/  /.  'Z.2"5 


LIBRARY  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 

PRINCETON.     N.    J. 


Presented  by 


"TVieWicAow  of  Greorp'eDuo^n  ?    "^ 


^et;w».>...u..4!-..y  k 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/bookofruth43cass 


THE 


BOOK    OF    RUTH. 


PAQLUS   CASSEL,  D.  D., 


PROFESSOR    IN    BERLIH. 


TRANSLATED  FROM  THE  GERMAN,  WITH  ADDITIONS. 


P.  R.  STEEXSTRA, 


PROFESSOR   OF   BIBLICAL   LITERATURE    IN    THE    PROTESTANT   EPISCOPAL    DITrHITT    (OHOOC 

AT   CAMBRIDGE,    MASS. 


NEW  YORK: 
CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS, 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1871,  by 

Charles   Scribnek  and  Company, 
<»  tk«  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washingta*. 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


INTRODUCTION. 

§  1.      Contents  and  Aim. 

The  little  Book  of  Ruth,  the  exposition  of  which  usually  follows  that  of  the  Book  of 
Judges,  consists  of  only  eighty-five  verses  ;  but  these  inclose  a  garden  of  roses,  as  fragrant 
and  full  of  mystic  calyxes,  as  those  which  the  modern  traveller  still  finds  blooming  and  twin- 
ing about  the  solitary  ruins  of  Israel  and  Moab,  this  side  the  Jordan  and  beyond.  The  sig- 
nificance and  beauty  of  the  brief  narrative  cannot  be  highly  enough  estimated,  whether 
regard  be  hail  to  the  thought  which  fills  it,  the  historical  value  which  marks  it,  or  the  pure 
uu  1  charming  form  in  which  it  is  set  forth.  It  will  be  necessan  rightly  to  seize  its  funda- 
mental idea,  in  order  to  treat  to  advantage  the  other  historical  questions  which  present 
themselves  with  reference  to  the  time  of  its  composition  and  place  in  the  canon  of  the  Old 
Covenant. 

Au  ancient  Israelitish  family  of  Bethlehem  fell  into  misery.  They  had  left  their  native 
country  in  a  time  of  distress,  in  order  to  save  themselves  from  participating  in  it.  But  in 
the  stranger's  land,  in  Moab,  a  harder  fate  alights  upon  them.  Death  carries  off  father  and 
miiis;  the  mother  remains  behind,  childless  and  widowed.  True,  she  has  daughters-in-law; 
but  these  are  without  offspring,  and  —  Moabitesses,  aliens,  not  without  fault  chosen  to  be 
wives  of  her  sons.  Naomi's  situation  is  as  bad  as  it  can  be.  In  Moab  she  cannot  remain ; 
sorrowfully  she  returns  to  Bethlehem.  Her  house  is  desolated  ;  upon  herself,  rests  the  hand 
of  God.  But  in  the  midst  of  despair,  a  consolation  arises  for  her.  Ruth,  her  Moabitish 
daughter-in-law,  remains  with  her,  —  no  dissuasion  of  her  mother-in-law  restrains  her.  She 
gives  up  everything,  native  land  and  paternal  home,  yea,  even  the  hope  of  better  fortunes, 
continues  faithful  to  her  love  for  Naomi,  and  goes  with  her  to  her  God  and  her  people,  —  but 
in  tears,  poverty,  and  bereavement. 

Naomi  arrives  at  Bethlehem,  but  no  one  helps,  no  one  comforts  her.  Ruth  alone  becomes 
her  support,  —  she  labors,  she  begs  for  her.  Her  piety,  however,  does  not  remain  unknown. 
The  kindnesses  done  to  these  women  by  Boaz,  on  whose  fields  Ruth  had  been  gleaning,  origi- 
nated solely  in  the  man's  admiration  of  the  pious  love  of  Ruth,  although  it  is  true  that  he  was 
a  kinsman  of  Naomi.  Ruth  the  noble  man  blesses,  because  she  has  taken  refuse  under  the 
wings  of  God  in  Israel.  She  reinstates  her  mother-in-law  in  the  good-will  of  her  relatives. 
She  overcomes  the  prejudices  of  Israel  against  the  stranger.  The  rights  of  an  Israelitish 
wife  fall  to  her  lot.  But  it  is  only  on  account  of  her  love  and  purity  that  the  blessing 
of  Boaz  fulfills  itself.  For  her  mother's  sake  she  enters  once  more  on  a  hard  and  difficult 
road.  But  thereby  the  sorrow  of  Naomi  is  at  last  lifted  away.  Boaz  fulfills  to  Ruth  the 
law  of  Israel,  and  marries  her.  From  the  Moabitess  springs  the  son,  of  whom  David,  the 
king  of  Israel,  who  rose  from  among  the  flocks  of  Bethlehem  to  be  a  hero  and  a  prophet,  is 
the  celebrated  grandson. 

With  good  reason  the  book  is  not  called  "  Naomi,"  or  "  Boaz,"  or  "  the  Descent  of  David," 
but  "  Ruth."  For  she  is  the  central  point  of  the  whole  narrative.  Her  love  is  the  ground- 
work of  the  history  it  relates.  That  she  became  the  ancestress  of  David  was  only  the  reward 
af  her  virtue.  The  idea  to  be  set  forth,  and  which  gives  such  great  significance  to  the  little 
book,  is,  the  power  of  love,  as  conquering  all  national  contrarieties,  hostilities,  and  prejudices 

It  is  not  a  story  of  romantic  love  between  man  and  woman,  but  of  the  reverential  love  of  a 
widow  for  the  mother  of  her  deceased  husband.  The  love  portrayed  in  the  character  of  Ruth 
is  of  the  purest,  most  unselfish,  most  extraordinary  kind.     It  is  for  the  sake  of  this  love,  to 


INTRODUCTION. 


indicate  its  nature,  that  the  strength  which  leaTes  father  and  mother,  and  accepts  the  God 
of  Israel,  is  delineated.  For  Naomi  can  be  thus  loved  of  Ruth  only  because  the  latter  has 
some  intuitive  perception  of  the  higher  life  of  the  God  of  Israel  in  her  mother-in-law. 

The  Jewish  narrative,  therefore,  does  not  only,  with  unselfish  uprightness,  set  forth  the  over- 
powering depth  of  affection  of  a  Moabitess  ;  it  teaches  also  that  such  love  is  valid  before  Ood, 
without  respect  of  race,  that  through  it  Ruth  is  more  deeply  implanted  into  the  kingdom  of 
the  true  Israel  than  are  natural  children  —  consequently  the  women  say  to  Naomi,  that 
Ruth  is  better  for  her  than  seven  sons  —  and  that  the  blessing  of  God  was  poured  out  in 
superabundant  measure  on  Ruth,  although  a  foreigner,  because  she  had  confessed  the  God 
of  Israel  in  love  and  from  love. 

The  narrative  displays  no  hatred  toward  foreigners,  gives  no  prominence  to  the  keen  dis- 
criminations of  the  Mosaic  law  against  them,  notwithstanding  that  they  form  the  background 
of  the  story ;  does  not  blame  the  really  well-disposed  Orpah,  although  she  turns  back  ;  has 
not  a  word  of  reprehension  for  the  anonymous  relative  who  refuses  to  marry  Ruth  ;  but  in 
contrast  to  these  facts,  it  causes  the  brightness  of  the  blessing  that  lights  on  Ruth  to  become 
known.  Orpah  is  forgotten,  the  name  of  the  superstitious  kinsman  unknown,  but  Ruth  — 
is  the  grandmother  of  David. 

The  Book  was  not  written  for  the  glorification  of  the  king ;  for  how,  according  to  human 
views,  could  he  be  flattered  by  such  a  descent !  But  the  fact  of  David's  descent  from  Ruth, 
demonstrates  and  glorifies  the  praise  of  such  as  act  as  she  did.  It  is  a  book  of  praise  of  true 
love  and  virtue  ;  a  book  of  reconciliation  for  those  alien  nations  who  betake  themselves  under 
the  wings  of  the  living  God.  In  Boaz  and  Ruth,  Israel  and  the  Gentiles  are,  as  it  were,  per- 
sonified. In  order  to  come  under  the  wings  of  Israel,  nothing  is  needed  but  the  love  and 
faith  of  Ruth.  From  these,  and  not  from  legal  descent  according  to  the  flesh,  do  the  might 
and  glory  of  the  kingdom  of  God  proceed.  The  Book,  it  is  often  said,  with  its  contents,  stands 
at  the  portal  of  the  history  of  David  ;  according  to  its  spirit,  it  stands,  like  the  Psalms,  at 
the  gates  of  the  Gospel.  And  this  not  only  on  account  of  the  genealogy  of  Christ  in  the 
latter,  which  carries  us  back  to  David  and  Boaz,  but  because  of  the  spirit  which  informs  the 
doctrine  of  our  Book,  that  the  greatest  king  of  Israel  sprang  from  the  reconciliation  of  Israel 
and  the  Gentiles,  from  the  marriage  of  Boaz  and  Ruth  in  the  confession  of  Jehovah. 

§  2.     Time  of  Composition. 

It  is  precisely  the  free  and  loving  spirit  with  which  Ruth  is  depicted,  the  Moabitess  set 
forth  as  the  ancestress  of  David  for  the  instruction  and  joy  of  the  reader,  that  enables  us,  on 
somewhat  closer  inspection,  to  determine,  with  considerable  definiteness,  the  time  in  which 
alone  the  book  can  have  been  written.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  Books  of  Samuel  say 
nothing  of  the  descent  of  David  from  Ruth.  Without  the  little  book  now  under  considera- 
tion, this  fact  would  be  entirely  unknown  to  us.  For  the  Book  of  Chronicles  also,  although 
it  names  Boaz  as  the  ancestor  of  David  in  such  a  way  that  it  were  easy  to  believe  that  use 
was  made  of  the  last  verses  of  Ruth,  passes  over  the  name  of  Ruth  in  utter  silence. 

That  our  Book  cannot  have  been  written  after  Solomon,  is  evident  from  1  Kgs.  xi.  1,  where 
the  king  is  blamed  for  having  taken  many  foreign  wives  of  Moab,  Ammon,  Edom,  Zidon,  and 
Heth,  "  nations  concerning  which  Jehovah  said  to  the  sons  of  Israel,  Ye  shall  not  go  in  to 
them,  neither  shall  they  come  in  unto  you."  It  is  not  for  the  honor  of  Rehoboam  that  the 
historian  relates  that  his  mother  was  Naamah,  an  Ammonitess  (1  Kgs.  xiv.  21).  Nor  is  it 
without  design  that  the  (second)  Book  of  Chronicles,  ch.  xxiv.  26  (the  passage  is  wanting  in 
Kings)  informs  us  that  the  mother  of  one  of  the  murderers  of  King  Joash  was  a  Moabitess, 
of  the  other  an  Ammonitess.  Ezra  says  (ch.  x.  10)  :  "  Ye  have  transgressed,  and  have 
taken  strange  wives ;  "  and  the  names  of  those  who  were  to  separate  from  their  wives  were 
noted  down.  Nehemiah  (ch.  xiii.  1  ff.)  went  so  far  as  to  execute  strictly  the  law  that  "  no 
Ammonite  or  Moabite  should  come  into  the  congregation  of  God  forever."  These  nega- 
"ive  data  are  sufficient  of  themselves  to  refute  the  opinion  that  the  book  written  in  praise  of  a 
Moabitess  who  did  enter  into  the  congregation  of  God,  was  perhaps  composed  in  the  times 
jttir  Solomon,  or  during  the  exile,  or  when  the  spirit  of  Ezra  or  Nehemiah  was  in  the 
ascendant.  It  is  especially  clear  that  it  cannot  have  been  written  in  the  Exile,  for  in  that 
situation  Israel  maintained  the  sharpest  separation  between  itself  and  the  Gentiles  1  (cf.  Esth. 

I  The  Miphna  (Jebamoth,  ii.  6)  decided  that  a  Lerirate  marriage  cannot  be  demanded  by  a  brother-in-law,  if  he  be  th« 
K>u   >f  a  slave  woman  or  of  a  foreigner. 


INTRODUCTION.  5 


iii.  8).  The  Book,  moreover,  exhibits  a  homelike,  peaceful  coloring  inconsistent  with  that 
lime  of  expatriation  and  distress.  It  cannot  even  be  assigned  to  the  reign  of  Solomon  ; 
in  that  case  the  genealogy  at  the  close  would  hardly  have  failed  to  add  :  "  And  David  begal 
Solomon." 

But  there  are  not  wanting  positive  grounds  which  make  it  highly  probable  that  the  Book 
originated  in  the  time  of  David,  and  while  he  occupied  the  throne,  —  circumstances  which 
add  their  own  instruction  to  that  of  the  Book.  It  must  indeed  be  admitted  that  our  informa- 
tion concerning  the  great  revolution  brought  about  in  Israel  by  the  achievements,  spirit,  and 
reign  of  David,  is  very  meagre  and  fragmentary.  But  it  is  also  true  that  too  little  atten- 
tion has  been  paid  to  the  fact  that  the  new  occupant  of  the  throne  at  Jerusalem  was  nol 
merely  a  hero,  but  a  creative  genius,  whom  singular  sufferings  and  experiences  had  thor- 
oughly tried,  and  in  whom  the  full  heart  of  Israel  beat  powerfully  and  grandly,  although  he 
appears  not  without  the  human  coloring  of  his  age.  From  the  very  opening  of  his  public 
career  in  the  combat  with  Goliath,  and  ever  after,  he  displays,  as  no  one  else  did,  the  enthu- 
siastic strength  of  faith  and  the  immovable  religious  convictions  of  a  true  Israelite ;  and  yet 
it  was  he,  driven  into  exile  through  Saul's  distrust,  who  more  than  any  other  hero  or  prince, 
before  or  after,  came  into  peculiar  contact  with  alien  nations.  It  was  doubtless  due,  in  part 
at  least,  to  the  recollection  that  his  great-grandmother  was  a  Moabitess,  that  he  went  to  the 
king  of  Moab  and  said,  "  Let  my  father  and  my  mother,  I  pray  thee,  come  forth  and  be 
with  you,  till  I  know  what  God  will  do  to  me"  (1  Sam.  xxii.  3).  Accordingly,  he  causes  his 
father  and  mother  to  emigrate  to  the  same  country  whither  Elimelech  and  his  family  had 
gone.  And  they  remained  in  Moab  until  David  was  master  of  Jerusalem.  So  also,  at  a 
later  time,  he  remembers  that  the  king  of  Amnion  had  formerly  shown  him  kindness  (2  Sam. 
x.  2).  While  he  was  hiding  in  the  cave  of  Adullam,  all  sorts  of  wild  and  warlike  people 
collected  about  him,  of  whom  he  formed  his  band  of  heroes  and  afterwards  his  body-guard. 
Their  names  Kerethi  and  Pelethi  (2  Sam.  viii.  18,  etc.)  sufficiently  indicate  their  foreign 
origin.  He  abode  a  long  time  in  the  Philistine  city  of  Gath  (1  Sam.  xxvii.)  ;  and  there 
bands  of  brave  men  attached  themselves  so  entirely  to  him,  that  they  continued  faithful  to 
him  even  in  his  last  great  distress,  brought  upon  him  by  Absalom  (2  Sam.  xv.  18).  But 
everywhere  he  bore  aloft  the  banner  of  his  God  and  people.  Whoever  followed  him,  entered 
not  merely  into  his  personal  interests,  but  also  into  those  of  Israel  (cf.  1  Sam.  xxvi.  10.  etc.). 
Through  the  glory  and  heroism  of  his  history,  aided  by  the  preparatory  influence  of  Saul's 
achievements,  the  heathen,  who  till  then  continued  to  reside  among  Israel,  were  undoubtedly 
for  the  most  part  amalgamated  with  Israel,  so  that  the  intellectual  preponderance  of  Israel, 
reinforced  by  military  superiority,  suppressed  idolatry  and  extended  the  acknowledgment  of 
Jehovah. 

We  are  reminded  here  especially  of  Uriah,  who  fell  a  victim  to  David's  unlawful  passions. 
This  man,  a  hero  and  distinguished  personage  in  Israel,  was  a  Hittite  or  descendant  of  Heth 
(2  Sam.  xi.  3).  From  his  widow,  that  is,  from  an  Israelitish  woman  once  married  to  a 
Hittite,  sprang  king  Solomon,  just  as  David  descended  from  a  Moabitish  woman,  the  widow 
of  an  Israelite.  Nor  is  Uriah  the  only  foreigner  among  David's  distinguished  warriors  ;  the 
list  includes  also  an  Ammonite  named  Zelek  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  37).  It  is  remarkable,  also,  that 
David  deposits  the  ark  of  God  in  the  house  of  a  Gittite,  that  is,  a  man  who  originated  in 
Gath,  a  city  of  the  Philistines.  He  was  called  Obed  Edom,  thus  bearing  the  same  name 
with  David's  grandfather,  the  son  of  Ruth.1  His  surname  Edom  also  betrays  his  alien 
origin.  The  ark  of  God  was  three  months  in  his  dwelling,  and  God  blessed  him  and  his 
house. 

Yet  more  noteworthy  is  the  fact  that  in  the  saddest  hours  of  David's  life,  when  his  favorite 
son,  Absalom,  and  the  chief  men  of  Israel  fell  away  from  him,  only  such  as  had  turned  from 
among  alien  nations  to  Israel  and  its  God  remained  true  to  him.  He  himself  had  the  fame 
experience  which  Naomi  had  with  Ruth  ;  they  who  loved  him  dared  everything  for  him  and 
with  him.  An  Ammonite  supplies  him  with  provisions  in  his  flight  (2  Sam.  xvii.  27). 
Especially  prominent  is  Hushai  the  Archite,2  the  companion  of  David,  who  in  the  hour  of 
distress  adheres  to  him,  and  renders  him  most  important  service  at  the  court  of  Absalom,  in 

1  In  the  Levirate  marriage  of  Ruth  the  symbolism  of  the  shoe  was  employed.  Obed  Edom  was  the  son  of  such  a 
marriage.  It  is  precisely  with  reference  to  Edom  that  the  figurative  expression  :  (t  I  cast  my  shoe  upon  It,"  twice  occuri 
in  the  Psalms  (lx.  and  cviii.).  The  Book  of  Chronicles  first  calls  Obed  Edom  a  Levite.  Errors,  however,  such  as  thost 
Into  which  expositors  fell  concerning  Kenaz  (cf.  Com.  on  Judges,  ch.  i.  16),  must  here  also  b*  avoided. 

2  Of  Arke,  in  Phoenicia.      Cf.  Movers,  Plwnizier,  II.  i.  116. 


INTRODUCTION. 


thwarting  the  intrigues  of  the  apostate  Ahithophel  (2  Sam.  xv.  32  ff.).  Touching  is  th'. 
fidelity  of  Ittai,  the  man  of  Gath.  The  king  says  to  him  (2  Sam.  xv.  19  ff.)  :  "  Wherefore 
guest  thou  also  with  us  ?  return  to  thy  place,  and  abide  with  the  king,  for  thou  art  a  stranger. 
If  thou  art  banished,  go  to  thy  native  place.1  Whereas  thou  earnest  but  yesterday,  should 
I  this  day  make  thee  go  up  and  down  with  us  ?  seeing  I  go  whither  I  may  ;  return  thou,  and 
take  back  thy  brethren  :  mercy  and  truth  be  with  thee  !  "  David,  the  fleeing  king,  who  in 
his  old  age  must  leave  his  capital,  speaks  like  Naomi.  The  answer  of  Ittai  shows  that  he, 
like  Ruth,  has  turned  to  the  God  of  Israel :  "  As  Jehovah  liveth,  and  as  my  lord  the  king 
liveth,  surely  in  what  place  my  lord  the  king  shall  be,  whether  in  death  or  life,  even  there 
also  will  thy  servant  be."  Never  again,  in  the  history  of  the  ancient  Israel,  do  such  relationa 
come  to  view.  Under  their  influence,  and  therefore  during  the  reign  of  David,  the  composition 
of  a  book  which  commemorates  the  truth  and  love  of  a  Gentile,  was  perfectly  natural.  It  is 
a  signature  of  the  spirit,  more  active  in  Israel  then  than  at  any  other  time,  which  recognized 
faith  in  God  as  the  kernel  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  saw  that  not  only  natural,  but  also 
spiritual  Israelites  could  become  its  children.  It  must  not  be  overlooked  that  it  is  especially 
in  the  Psalms  that  the  relations  of  the  Gentiles  to  the  kingdom  of  God  are  unfolded.  Take 
as  specimens  of  many  similar  passages,  these  two  :  "  Thou  makest  me  the  head  of  the  nations  ; 
a  people  that  I  knew  not,  serves  me  "  (Ps.  xviii.  43).'2  "  All  the  families  of  the  nations  shall 
bow  down  before  thee ;  for  the  kingdom  is  Jehovah's,  and  he  rules  among  the  nations  "  (Ps. 
xxii.  27,  28).8 

To  point  out  definitely  the  years  of  David's  reign  during  which  the  Book  was  written,  will 
hardly  be  possible.  But  it  is  not  improbable  that  it  was  done  when  he  stood  on  the  summit 
of  his  glory  and  enjoyed  peace  on  all  sides.  At  that  time,  a  contemplative  view  of  the  king's 
history,  in  which  so  many  men  of  alien  origin  had  distinguished  themselves  by  wonderful 
fidelity,  gave  rise  to  our  Book.  It  may  be  assumed  that  its  narrative  concerning  David's 
excellent  ancestress  influenced  the  bearing  of  the  kind's  faithful  Gentile  subjects,  as  manifested 
in  the  catastrophe  of  Absalom.  It  is  a  genuine  historical  characteristic  of  the  reign  of  David, 
that  it,  and  not  the  Psalter  merely,  is  Messianic.  It  is  informed  by  the  idea  of  universality 
bounded  only  by  the  acknowledgment  of  Jehovah.  It  brought  about  closer  connections 
between  Israel  and  the  Gentiles,  which  continued  to  exist  in  the  reign  of  Solomon.  The 
fall  of  this  king,  toward  the  close  of  his  reign,  consists  in  the  very  fact  that  he  no  longer 
subjected  these  connections  to  the  domination  of  the  God  of  Israel,  but  suffered  his  own  faith 
and  morals  to  be  overcome  by  heathen  influences.  Solomon  would  not  have  been  to  blame 
for  taking  wives  of  Moab  and  Ammon,  if  these,  like  Ruth,  had  confessed  Jehovah  ;  his  fall 
consisted  in  his  taking  heathen  wives,  who  withdrew  him  from  the  pure  service  of  God.  The 
Messianic  idea  was  distorted,  consequently  obliterated  and  for  a  long  time  lost,  and  only 
restored  by  the  vision  of  the  prophets. 

Nothing  of  importance  can  be  urged  against  assigning  the  origin  of  our  Book  to  this  period, 
almost  the  only  time  in  which  it  can  have  been  written.  The  arguments  which  Bertheau, 
alter  Ewald  and  other  earlier  critics,  founds  on  linguistic  peculiarities,  are  not  at  all  conclu- 
sive, and  are  sufficiently  met  by  Keil's  counter-remarks  (Einleit.  §  137).  The  more  unusual 
expressions  are  due  to  the  peculiarities  of  the  matter,  and  are  also  to  be  met  with  elsewhere. 
The  narrative  exhibits  life  in  its  popular  aspect,  and  probably  makes  use  of  popular  forms  of 
speech  which  to  us  seem  Chaldaizing.  This  very  circumstance  attests  the  antiquity  of  the 
Book.  A  book  of  similar  character,  written  in  the  Exile,  would  no  longer  possess  the  mani- 
Ibld  idioms  peculiar  to  original  forms  and  views  of  life.  Considering  the  small  number  of 
literary  productions  that  have  come  down  to  us  from  the  several  earlier  centuries  of  Hebrew 
history,  and  our  ignorance  of  the  places  of  their  composition  and  the  dialect  of  their  writers, 
it  is  manifest  that  any  attempts  to  fix  the  time  in  which  any  work  was  written  by  means  of  a 
few  grammatical  peculiarities  alone,  must  always  be  exceedingly  problematical.  In  the 
present  case,  however,  the  contents  of  the  Book  itself  contradict  the  conclusion  to  which  such 
a  method  of  argumentation  has  led.  For  these  speak  decidedly  against  an  exilic,  and  in  favor 
of  a  Palestinian  origin,  in  a  peaceful,  and  indeed  a  definitely  limited  period.  Critics  have 
paid  only  too  little  continuous  attention  to  these  contents,  and  hence  were  led  to  overestimate 
lundry  externalities  of  the  Book. 

i  [This  is  Dr.  Cassel's  own  rendering  of  the  difficult  words  TJpS~nb   HPS  nVS'DS"!.—  Tb-1 
2  This  Psalm,  at  least,  is  admitted  by  Olshauaen  also  to  be  Davidic.     Psalmrn,  p.  98. 

8  The  history  of  this  Psalm  might  alone  testify  to  a  higher  antiquity  than  modern  criticism  will  allow  it.  DelltaBoh 
»y«  (Die  P$ahnmt  p.  194)  :   "  It  is  a  Davidic  Psalm,  of  the  time  during  which  its  author  was  persecuted  by  Saul." 


INTRODUCTION. 


§  3.     Position  in  the  Canon. 

The  position  which  Jewish  tradition  assigned  to  our  Book  in  the  Canon,  may  likewise 
be  due  to  the  spirit  of  its  contents.  The  Septuagint,  it  is  true,  attached  it  closely  to  the 
Book  of  Judges,  as  if  it  were  but  an  appendix  of  that  work,1  and  was  followed  therein  by 
Josephus  and  the  Christian  Fathers  who  were  for  the  most  part  dependent  on  that  version. 
I'ussibly,  the  desire  to  make  the  number  of  books  equal  to  the  number  of  letters  in  the  alpha- 
.iet  may  have  contributed  to  this  result;  for  even  in  later  times  the  supposed  coincidence  was 
invested  with  symbolical  significance.  Ecclesiastes,  Proverbs,  and  Canticles  could  not  be  so 
directly  attached  to  another  book,  there  being  none  specially  devoted  to  the  history  of  Solo- 
mon, while  Ruth  and  Lamentations  could  readily  be  joined  to  other  writings.  But  it  cannct 
have  been  for  liturgical  purposes  merely,  that  the  Canon  of  the  Palestinian  Jews,  as  appears 
from  the  Talmud,  corroborated  by  manuscripts  and  traditions,  considers  Ruth  as  well  as 
Lamentations  as  a  separate  work,  and  never  unites  it  with  Judges.  If  the  little  work  be 
viewed  simply  as  a  genealogical  narrative  introductory  to  the  history  of  David,  then,  indeed, 
its  proper  place  is  between  Judges  and  the  Books  of  Samuel.  But  since  this  is  not  its  true 
character,  since  it  sets  forth  a  higher  idea,  of  which  the  birth  of  David  is  but  the  crown  and 
confirmation,  an  independent  position  was  rightly  assigned  to  it.  The  Messianic  doctrine 
contained  in  it  invested  it  with  greater  importance.  Now,  from  the  fact  that  the  Jews  con- 
tinued the  Book  in  this  separate  and  independent  position,  although  they  saw  that  the  follow- 
ers of  Christ  viewed  him  as  the  descendant  of  Ruth,  it  may  be  inferred  that  in  the  Palestin- 
ian canon  Ruth  held,  even  before  the  birth  of  our  Lord,  the  same  position  as  at  present.  It 
harmonizes  well  with  this,  that  from  primitive  times  the  Book  was  read  during  the  Feast  of 
Weeks.  For  this  cannot  have  been  done  simply  because  a  harvest  scene  occurs  in  it.2  The 
practice  must  rather  be  connected  with  a  belief  that  Ruth  prefigures  the  entrance  of  the 
heathen  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  with  the  idea  that  the  Feast  of  Weeks  was  a  celebra- 
tion of  the  giving  of  the  law  on  Sinai,  which  law,  as  the  Midrash  explains,  was  given  to  all 
nations,  only  it  was  not  accepted  by  them.  The  Feast  of  Weeks,  we  know,  corresponded  to 
the  Christian  Pentecost,  when  the  Holy  Ghost  was  poured  out,  according  to  the  words  of  Joel, 
on  all  flesh,  and  the  Gospel  was  preached  to  all  the  world. 

Undoubtedly,  however,  the  Book  of  Ruth  offers  an  interesting  parallel  to  that  of  Judges. 
While  the  latter  exhibits  the  military  history  of  Israel,  the  former  introduces  us  to  the  peace- 
ful private  life  of  the  people.  We  hear  no  trumpet-blasts  or  pseans  of  triumph,  only  the  rus- 
tling of  the  sickles  among  the  grain  stalks  salutes  our  ears.  We  find  ourselves  transported 
into  the  rural  family  life  of  Israel.  Not  the  warrior  or  king,  but  the  farmer  and  householder 
find  their  prototypes  here.3  The  little  book  relates  a  narrative  of  social  village  life,  and  within 
it-  brief  compass  exhibits  the  profoundest  sorrow,  the  noblest  love,  and  all  the  attractiveness 
of  an  Israelitish  life  of  faith.  Naomi  and  Boaz  are  not  painted  in  the  same  colors  as  Deb- 
orah and  Gideon.  But  the  love  of  Ruth  and  Orpahcan  only  have  grown  up  in  the  household 
uf  Nnuui.  Israel's  fathers  anft  husbands  must  have  so  lived  as  to  enchain  even  after  their 
death  the  hearts  of  foreign  and  childless  widows.  With  what  nobility  and  moral  beauty  the 
faithful  in  Israel  were  adorned,  is  seen  in  Poaz.  The  whole  picture  is  surmounted  by  a  calm, 
clear  sky.  The  reader  finds  himself  now  in  the  open  field,  now  on  the  road,  and  anon 
among  the  assembly  of  citizens  at  the  gate.  The  unadorned  narrative  shows  such  art  in 
grouping,  preserves  such  moderation,  causes  the  finest  lessons  to  shine  through  so  geutly,  and 
withal  displays  such  great  vivacity,  that  the  aesthetics  of  the  little  work  alone  yield  an 
important  testimony  to  its  origin.  It  can  have  arisen  only  under  surroundings  such  as  those 
it  describes.     It  breathes  an  air  of  freedom  and  peace  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  unrest 

1  [Subjoined  it  without  a  separate  title.  The  Jewish  canon  placea  it  in  the  third  class  of  O.  T.  books,  the  Kethubiu; 
or  Hagiographa.  Its  place  in  this  class  is  variable  ;  the  Talmud  and  some  MSS.  give  it  the  first,  but  most  MSS.  the  fifth 
place.     Of.  Wright,  Book  of  Rullt,  introd.  §  xi.  4.  —  Tr.] 

-  The  reasons  for  this  usage  given  by  Raschi  and  others,  are,  in  their  final  consequences,  undoubtedly  tantamount  to 
tile  proclamation  of  the  kingdom  of  Ood  among  the  nations.     Cf.  Heidenheim,  Machsor  Schebnotk,  1811,  p.  106,  note. 

8  [Wordsworth  (contrasting  the  Book  of  Kuth  with  that  of  Judges)  :  The  Book  of  Ruth  is  like  some  beautiful  land 
scape  of  Claude,  with  its  soft  mellow  hues  of  quiet  eventide,  and  the  peaceful  expanse  of  its  calm  lake,  placed  side  by 
side  with  some  stern  picture  of  Salvator  Rosa,  exhibiting  the  shock  of  armies  and  the  storm  of  war  ;  and  receiving  more 
beauty  from  the  chiaro-oscuro  of  the  contrast.  Or,  if  we  may  adopt  another  comparison,  derived  from  classical  literature, 
'.he  Book  of  Ruth,  coming  next  after  the  Book  of  Judges  [which  he  regards  as  its  proper  place],  is  like  a  transition  from 
the  d;irk,  terrific  scenes  of  a  tragedy  of  JSschylus,  to  the  fresh  and  beautiful  landscapes  of  some  pastoral  idyl  of  Theoc- 
ritus transporting  us  to  the  rural  Thalysia,  or  harvest-home,  under  the  shade  of  elms  and  poplars,  on  the  banks  of  th« 
lialis  yl/lyl  vii.  1,  8),  or  to  the  rlowery  meadows  and  sheepwalks  on  those  of  the  Arethusa  or  Anapus  (blijl  i.  6H  117 
tii    151,  -  Tr] 


3  INTRODUCTION. 

and  servitude  of  the  Exile.  Indeed,  one  is  tempted  to  believe  that  the  author  must  hav« 
lived  in  Bethlehem  itself.  He  loves  to  indicate,  with  untutored  art,  the  peculiarities  of 
speech  which  obtain  among  his  dramatis  persona:.  He  makes  his  rustics  talk  in  rustic 
fashion,1  while  yet,  when  Boaz  speaks  on  elevated  subjects,  the  language  rises  to  the  level  of 
the  theme. 

§  4.      Time  of  the  History, 

The  time  in  which  the  occurrences  themselves  took  place,  can  hardly  be  more  closely 
determined.  Boaz  was  the  great-grandfather  of  David.  For  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that 
between  Boaz  and  Obed,  or  Obed  and  Jesse,  other  names  have  fallen  out.  A  wider  remove 
of  Ruth  from  David  contradicts  the  thought  and  doctrine  of  the  Book.  The  view  that  Boaz 
may  have  been  a  contemporary  of  Gideon  2  is  without  anything  to  support  it.  The  Book 
suggests  not  a  hint  of  war ;  and  although  it  speaks  of  famine  in  the  land,  there  is  not  the 
least  indication  that  it  was  a  result  of  hostile  devastations.  Much  rather  does  eh.  i.  6  (cf.  the 
Comment.)  suggest  elemental  causes.  The  ancient  opinion,  found  in  Josephus,  which  places 
the  occurrences  of  our  Book  in  the  time  of  Eli,  has  certainly  much  greater  probability  in  its 
favor,  since  the  later  years  of  Boaz  and  the  life  of  Obed  may  be  conceived  as  running  parallel 
with  the  life  of  Eli,  and  that  of  Samuel  with  Jesse.  It  is  also  remarked  below  that  an  atti- 
tude of  mutual  hostility  between  Israel  and  the  Philistines,  may  explain  why  Elimelech  emi- 
grated to  Moab. 

Some  expositors  (Ewald,  Bertheau)  have  found  that  the  author  of  our  Book  maintains  a 
specially  "  learned  bearing,"  because  in  ch.  iv.  he  gives  information  concerning  certain  old 
customs,  and  have  inferred  from  it  that  he  must  have  written  at  a  late  period.  But  he  has 
only  done,  in  the  simplest  manner,  what  it  is  the  duty  of  every  narrator  to  do,  namely,  explain 
and  give  information  on  points  in  need  of  it.  He  gives  a  picture  of  popular  life ;  in  which 
he  no  more  excuses  himself  from  drawing  the  pursuit  of  the  humble  gleaner  than  the  transac- 
tions at  the  gate  of  the  city.  Perhaps  nothing  testifies  more  clearly  for  the  antiquity  of  the 
Book  than  ch.  iv.  The  Mosaic  law  speaks  of  the  pulling  off  of  the  shoe  only  in  the  particu- 
lar case  in  which  a  widow,  being  refused  marriage  by  her  deceased  husband's  brother,  is 
authorized  to  subject  the  offender  to  this  action  as  a  sign  of  disgrace.  But  this  was  only  a 
special  application  of  a  more  general  symbolical  idea  connected  with  the  shoe,  and  explana- 
tory of  its  earlier  use  in  transactions  of  exchange  and  redemption  generally.3  Now,  it  was 
just  because  the  Mosaic  law  prescribed  the  use  of  the  shoe  only  in  the  case  just  mentioned, 
that  it  ceased  to  be  used  on  other  occasions.  Consequently,  it  was  precisely  during  the  better 
observance  of  the  law  under  Samuel,  Saul,  and  David,  that  its  use  as  the  general  symbol  of 
transfer  of  rights  or  property  had  become  obsolete.  That  which  takes  place  at  the  gate  of 
Bethlehem  is  no  such  transaction  as  is  described  in  Deut.  xxv.  7  ff.  The  unknown  kinsman 
docs  not  regard  it  as  such.  It  has  reference  solely  to  the  redemption  of  the  landed  property. 
Nor  is  Ruth  present.  Had  the  Book  been  written  in  the  Exile,  when  the  letter  of  the  law 
had  become  impressed  upon  the  people,  an  explanation  of  this  absence  would  not  have  been 
wanting,  just  as  Josephus  conceives  it  necessary  to  add,  quite  in  opposition  to  the  narrative, 
that  Ruth  having  been  sent  for  by  Boaz,  the  whole  levirate  process  was  performed  according 
to  legal  prescription.     In  our  author's  time  the  recollection  of  the  usages  he  describes,  was 

1  A  fact  which  clearly  manifests  itself  in  the  so-called  Chaldaisms.  Compare,  for  instance,  the  conversation  of  Naomi 
with  her  daughters,  ch.  i.,  that  of  Boaz  with  Ruth,  ch.  ii.,  etc.     Cf.  Keil,  Einkituns;,  §  137.  note  2. 

'2  [Among  later  writers  who  favor  this  opinion,  Hengstenberg  may  be  mentioned,  who  urges  that  if  the  famine  had 
resulted  from  bad  harvests,  it  must  also  have  extended  to  the  neighboring  land  of  Moab,  and  points  out  how  well  the  ten 
years'  snjnurn  in  Moab  agrees  with  the  seven  years'  oppression  by  the  Midianites, for  "some  years  must  necessarily  have 
elapsed  till  the  land  could  recover  from  its  effects,  and  again  present  that  flourishing  state  of  cultivation  in  which  Naomi 
found  it  mi  her  return  "  i  Dissert,  on  Pent.,  ii.  92,  note.  Ky  land's  translation).  Bertheau  i,  Com.  p.  234)  replies  that  the 
time  i>l"  Gideon  is  inconsistent  with  the  genealogy  of  cb.  iv.  21,  22.  which  affords  the  only  certain  data  for  determining 
the  question.  He  places  the  history  in  the  latter  part  of  the  time  of  the  Judges,  or  somewhere  in  the  earlier  part  of  the 
Pailitftlne  domination  over  Israel.  Keil  in  his  EtnUilnns.  §  137,  note  1  (2d  edit  .  1859)  agrees  with  Bertheau,  and  fixes 
■  in  the  time  shortly  before  Eli;  but  in  bis  commentary  (pubL  18631  adopts  the  view  of  Hengstenberg,  and  although  he 
thinks  it  nut  impossible  that  the  genealogy  is  incomplete,  so  that  Obed  may  have  been  the  grandfather  of  Jesse,  yet 
ei.  leavon  t-.  snow  that  even  on  the  supposition  that  it  is  complete,  Obed  may  have  been  born  in  the  last  years  of  Gideon 
But  he  appears  to  forget  that  the  combination  of  the  famine  with  the  Midianitic  devastations  requires  Obed  to  be  born, 
lint  in  the  tist.  hut  in  the  earlier  years  of  Gideon  ;  for  the  impression  left  by  the  narrative  is  that  the  union  of  Ruth 
with  Boaz  tooh  place  not  very  long  after  the  return  from  Moab  (cf.  ch.  i.  22  h).  Now,  supposing  that  the  emigratioo 
occurred  in  the  fifth  year  of  the  Midianite  oppression,  the  return,  ten  years  afterwards,  would  fall  in  the  8th  year  of 
Qldeon.  But  from  say  the  10th  year  of  Gideon  to  the  birth  of  David  is  according  to  Keil's  own  reckoning,  a  period  of 
127  \t-ars.  somewhat  too  long  to  be  spanned  by  means  of  one  intervening  birth.  According  to  Dr.  Cassel's  chronology 
,cf.  lnlrod.  to  Judges,  §  4)  the  interval  would  be  thirty  years  longer.  — Ta.] 

3  Cf.  the  Commentary  on  ens.  hi.  and  iv. 


INTRODUCTION. 


fresher  ;  the  usages  themselves  having  disappeared  but  a  few  generations  before.  Nor  is  this 
notice  of  obsolete  customs  peculiar  to  the  Book  of  Ruth.  Other  O.  T.  books  make  similar 
explanations.  Thus,  the  author  of  the  Books  of  Samuel  observes  that  "  formerly  "  prophets 
were  called  "  seers  "  (1  Sam.  ix.  9)  ;  and  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Judges  frequently  givei 
the  earlier  names  of  cities  of  which  he  has  occasion  to  speak. 

§  5.      Translations  and  Commentaries. 

The  translation  of  our  Book  in  the  Septuagint  bears  a  verbal  character.  The  relation 
of  Josephus  (Ant.  v.  9)  evinces  his  efforts  to  bring  the  statements  of  the  Biblical  accounts 
into  harmonv  with  the  prescription  of  the  law  as  observed  in  his  time,  and  not  to  allow  the 
virtues  of  Israel  to  be  too  much  eclipsed  by  those  of  foreigners.  The  Chaldee  translation, 
the  Targum,  being  intended  for  the  public  instruction  of  the  people,  follows  the  same  course 
yet  more  decidedly.  It  carries  back  into  the  ancient  times  of  Ruth  a  good  deal  of  later 
apprehension  and  exposition.  Its  interpolations  may  be  found  collected,  for  the  most  part,  in 
the  Midrash  Ruth  Rabba,1  which,  on  its  part,  has  chiefly  drawn  from  the  Gemara  of  Jerusa- 
lem and  older  Midrashim.  The  Babylonian  Talmud  gives  expositions  of  detache  1  passages 
of  Ruth:  Berachoth,  7;  Sabbat.  113;  Jebamoth,  47;  Nasir,  23;  Babakama,  30;  Baba- 
bathra,  91;  Sanhedrin,  19.  There  is  another  collection  of  Rabbinical  interpretations  in 
JaUcut  Simeoni,  torn.  ii.  ed.  Venez.  n.  596  fl". 

Interesting  philological  explanations  on  the  Chaldee  version  of  the  Targum  are  given  in 
the  rare  book  :  Perush  hamiloth,  Krakau,  1540-44.  The  most  important  commentaries  of 
mediaeval  Jewish  scholars,  are  those  of  Rasehi  and  Ibn  Esra.  The  commentary  of  Solomon 
ben  Melech  was  published  by  Job.  Ben.  Carpzov,  in  the  Collegium  Rabbinico  Biblicum  in 
librum  Ruth,  Lips.  1703,  and  republished  by  Reland. 

The  earlier  Christian  theology  accorded  little  special  treatment  to  the  Book  of  Ruth.  Cas- 
siodorus  (De  Divinis  Lectionibus,  cap.  1)  says :  "  Ancient  expositions  I  have  nowhere  been 
able  to  find.  I  have  however  persuaded  the  pious  presbyter  Bellator  to  write  explanations, 
and  he  has  said  much  in  praise  of  this  woman  and  others  in  two  books."  But  of  the 
work  of  this  Bellator  nothing  is  known,  cf.  Serarius,  p.  680,  ch.  8.  In  later  ages,  the  expos- 
itors, older  and  more  recent,  of  the  Book  of  Judges,  are  also  to  be  consulted  on  Ruth.  Most 
prominent  among  these  are  the  commentaries  of  Rupert  v.  Deutz,  Saxctils.  Serarius, 
Grotius,  Clericus,  Rosenmiiller,  Maurer,  Bertheau,  and  Keil.2 

For  special  treatment  of  the  Book  of  Ruth,  the  following  are  to  be  named  :  Christ.  Aug. 
Heumann,  Poecile,  torn.  i.  180,  and  ii.  383  ;  J.  W.  Weinrich,  Hist,  und  theol.  Betrachtungen 
gelehrter  Dinge,  p.  237,  etc.;  Joh.  Jac.  Rambach,  Notaz  liberiores  in  libellum  Ruthie  ex.  rec. 
J.  H.  Michaelis  in  liberior.  adnot.  in  Hagiographos,  torn.  ii.  Halae,  1720.  The  Collegium  of 
Carpsov  has  already  been  mentioned. 

The  Book  was  translated  [into  German]  and  explained  by  Dereser,  Frankfort,  1806,  and 
by  von  Riegler,  Wiirzburg,  1812.  Compare  Umbreit  on  the  spirit  and  design  of  the  Book,  in 
the  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1834,  ii.  In  1856  appeared:  Metzger,  Liber  Ruth  ex  hebr.  in  Int. 
versus  perpetuceque  interpret,  illus/r.  Tub.  4. 

Useful  especially  for  teachers  of  Hebrew  is  :  The  Book  of  Ruth  in  Hebrew,  with  a  critically 
revised  Text,  various  Readings,  including  a  new  collation  of  twenty-eight  Hebrew  MSS-,  and 
a  grammatical  and  critical  Commentary ;  to  which  is  appended  the  Chaldee  Targum,  etc.,  by 
Charles  H.  H.  Wright,  M.  A.,  British  Chaplain  at  Dresden.     Leipzig,  1864. 

[Wordsworth's  Commentary  mentioned  in  the  Introduction  to  Judges  contains  notes  on 
Ruth  also.  A  Comment  on  Ruth,  by  Thomas  Fuller,  D.  D.,  London,  1868  (originally  pub- 
lished in  1654),  is  a  homiletical  production,  abounding  in  striking  thoughts  quaintly  expressed. 
It  only  extends,  however,  to  the  end  of  ch.  ii.  The  Rich  Kinsman,  or  History  of  Ruth,  by 
S.  H.  Tyng,  D.  D.,  N.  Y.—  Tr.] 

§  6.      Homiletical  Introduction.3 

The  Book  of  Ruth  is  one  of  the  smallest  in  the  O.  T.,  but  abounds  in  material  for 
homiletical  instruction.     It  was  admitted  into  the  canon  of  Holy  Scriptures   not  merely  on 

l  Cf.  Zunz,  GottadiemUiehe  Vortragc,  p.  265. 
i  Cf.  also  Wolff,  BMiotheea  Hebra-a,  ii.  78 ;  it.  18. 

3  [Here,  as  ia  Judges,  the  author  appended  his  'f  Homiletical  Hints  "  in  a  body  at  the  close  of  the  Commentary.     For 
he  sake  of  convenience  as  well  as  uuiforniity,  they  have  here  also  been  distributed  and  placed  in  immediate  connection 


10  INTRODUCTION. 


account  01  Is  ultimate  aim  and  issue,  but  also  for  the  instructiveness  of  the  narrative  in 
itself.  The  O.  T.  points  everywhere  through  history  to  completion,  even  as  Christ  him 
self  says  :  I  tm  .'he  Way  and  the  Truth,  the  Alpha  and  Omega. 

The  Book  jf  Ru'h  does  not  preach  by  means  of  mighty  deeds  of  war  inspired  by  faith,  like 
those  of  Gidt»>a  and  Samson,  but  by  acts  of  love,  which  demand  no  less  strength  of  soul 
(iod  can  be  pihised  not  only  with  timbrels  and  trumpets,  but  also  in  quietness  and  silence. 
There  is  a  heroism  of  faith  in  the  family,  at  the  sick-bed,  and  in  grief  for  those  we  love, 
which  is  not  inferior  to  that  of  Barak.  Jephthah  found  it  easier  to  triumph  over  Amnion 
than  to  subdue  his  sorrow  on  account  of  his  daughter.  It  is  often  easier  to  die  for  the  faith, 
than  in  the  midst  of  men  to  live  for  it. 

The  Book  tells  of  no  prophetic  woman  like  Deborah.  But  it  tells  of  women  who?e 
hearts  were  capable  of  pure  love,  and  such  love  is  always  prophetic.  The  fires  which  rouse 
a  nation  to  enthusiasm  glowed  in  Deborah  ;  but  in  the  women  of  our  book  burned  the  gentle 
rlames  of  the  household  hearth,  which  distress  and  desertion  cannot  quench.  The  Book 
of  Judges  tells  of  a  prophetess  who  was  strong  as  a  man ;  the  Book  of  Ruth  of  a  man  who 
was  tender  as  a  woman. 

No  psalms  lift  up  their  lofty  strains  in  the  Book  of  Ruth.  The  scene  of  its  history  is  not 
laid  in  the  temple  where  the  harp  of  God  resounds,  —  its  central  figure  is  neither  king  nor 
poet.  But  the  whole  Psalter  was  born  of  suffering  and  love  in  God,  like  as  David,  the 
psalmist,  descended  from  Ruth.  A  people  must  first  have  families  in  whom  God  is  mani- 
fested forth  by  love  and  truth,  before  inspired  singers  can  rise  up  from  it  to  tune  their  harps 
with  power.  By  the  side  of  Sarah  and  Rebecca  stands  the  retiring  woman,  who  as  Dante 
says  (Parad.  xxxii.  11),  was 

"  Ancestress  of  the  singer,  who  for  dole 
Of  the  misdeed  said,  Miserere  met." 

Our  Book  contains  no  stern  denunciations  nor  sorrowing  lamentations  over  Israel,  its  peo- 
ple, princes,  and  priests ;  but  deeply  impressive,  penetrating  to  the  heart,  is  the  instance  it 
gives  of  suffering,  love,  and  victory.  It  proposes  not.  like  Daniel,  to  unveil  the  destinies  of 
nations  and  the  world;  but  at  its  close  appears  the  Son  of  David  into  whose  Godhood  ill 
history  empties  as  the  rivers  into  the  ocean.  No  miracles  occur  in  it  like  that  of  the  three 
men  in  the  fiery  oven  ;  but  it  tells  of  three  believing  ones,  who  in  the  glowing  heat  of  sulk-r- 
ing and  temptation,  were  found  strong  and  true. 

with  the  sections  of  the  text  out  of  which  they  grow.  The  opening  paragraphs,  as  applying  to  the  whole  Boot,  are  hert 
inserted.  The  ''  Hints  "  proper  are  arranged  by  Dr.  Cassel  under  heads  which,  being  suggestive  in  themselves,  are  here 
subjaiued  :  I.  N'aomi  the  Beloved.  II.  Ruth  the  Loviug  :  1.  The  confessor  of  the  true  religion  ;  2.  The  woman  of  action  : 
3  The  difficult  suit  III.  Boaz  the  Well-doer:  1.  The  landed  proprietor;  2.  The  professor  of  religion  ;  3-  The  man  cf 
k  lion  ;  i    The  blessing.  —  T».) 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


CHAPTER    FIRST. 

Verses  1-6. 
Distress  in  a  Foreign  Land. 

1  Now  [And]  it  came  to  pass  in  the  days  when  the  judges  ruled  [judged],  thai 
there  was  a  famine  in  the  land.  And  a  certain  [omit :  certain]  man  of  Beth-lehem- 
judah  went  to  sojourn  in   the  country  [territories1]   of  Moab,  he,  and  his  wife,  and 

2  his  two  sons.  And  the  name  of  the  man  was  Elimelech,  and  the  name  of  his  wife 
Naomi  [Noomi],2  and  the  name  of  his  two  sons  Mahlon  and  Chilion,  Ephrathites  of 
Beth-lehera-judah.     And  they  came  into  the  country  [territories]  of  Moab,  and  con- 

3  tinned    [lit.  were,  i.  p.,  abode]   there.     Ami    Elimelech  Naomi's   husband    died;  and    >\\v 

4  was  left,  and  her  two  sons.  And  they  took  them  wives  of  the  women  of  Moab 
[Moabitish  wives];  the   name  of  the  one  was  Orpah,  and  the  name  of  the  other 

.'>  Ruth  :  and  they  dwelled  there  about  ten  years.  And  Mahlou  and  Chilion  died  also 
both  of  them  ;  8  and  the  woman  was  left  [behind]4  of  her  two  sons  and  her  husband. 

0  Then  she  arose  with  her  daughters-in-law,  that  she  might  return  [and  returned]  from 
the  country  [territories]  of  Moab  :  for  she  had  heard  in  the  country  [territory]  of 
Moab  how  [omit:  how]  that  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  had  visited  his  people  in  giving  [to 
give]  them  bread. 

TEXTUAL    AND   GRAMMATICAL. 
[1  Ver.  1.  — Prop,  fields,  plains.     The  form    S"TC   is  variously  explained.     Bertheau  regards  it  as  another  mode  of 
writing    mtt7,    which  occurs  in  ver.  6  of  this  chapter,  and  in  ch.  iv.  3,  and  according  to  Wright  is  in  many  MSS.  found 

hew  also.  The  original  *  of  nouns  derived  from  I"T  ?  stems  frequently  reappears  before  suffixes  (Ges.  Gr.  93.  9, 
Rem  ),  and  Berth,  thinks  that  the  same  change  is  occasioned  by  the  close  connection  of  the  word  with  the  following 
genitive  (of.  Ges.  89,  1).  Ewald  also  takes  s*7ll7  to  be  singular,  but  derives  it  from  the  ancient  form  ''TCP,  the  con- 
struct of  which  might  be  ^lii?  after  the  analogy  of  sPt  const.  T7,  S^T  const.  ^^T,  etc.  But  NT  "  is  not  found 
in  Rutb,  unless  it  be  in  the  disguise  of  the  construct,  while  mt£?  occurs  not  less  than  nine  times.  Better,  therefore, 
with  Gesenius,  Fiirst,  and  others,  take  ^TK?  as  plural  construct  of  mtC.  Keil  proposes  to  make  ^ItD  plural  const. 
of    *"TI£?     pi.    D*1"!^  (which  however  is  not  fouud  anywhere) ;  for  what  reason  does  not  appear,  unless  it  be  that  the 

plural  of  m27  is  usually  feminine,  whereas  *"7tt?  is  masc.  But  such  irregularities  are  not  uncommon  ;  see  Green 
Gr.  200,  c.  The  interchange  of  the  singular  and  plural  is  readily  accounted  for  from  the  meauing  of  the  word,  which. 
according  to  the  more  or  less  definite  conception  in  the  miud  of  the  writer  at  the  moment,  may  represent  the  territory  as 
">ne  great  field  or  as  made  up  of  many  smaller  fields.  — Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  2.  —    J2V2  :    Noomi,  as  the  name  should  be  written.     Sept.  NtueuiV  ;   Vulg.  Noemi.  —  Ta  ] 
[8  Ver.  5. —  Better  :  "  Then  died  they  two  also.  Mahlou  and  Chilion''  —  Ta.] 

[4   Ver.  5  —  "")S*V^1  i  *    not,  ,f  was  left  from,  i.  e.  was    bereaved  of,''  as  Wright  (with    the  Vulgate)   interprets, —  on 
■•  t    •    -  ' 

the  ground  that  tbe  T!^  changes  the  simple  meaning  of  the  verb  as  found  in  ver.  3.  "]?I2  has  its  proper  partitive  meaning, 
and  points  out  the  whole  of  which  Naomi  is  now  the  only  part  left,  cf.  Deut.  Hi.  11 ;  Neh.  i.  2,  3.  The  enumeration  of  the 
whole  is  so  far  incomplete  that  it  does  not  expressly  include  Naomi  herself.  In  ver.  3  the  verb  is  used  without  ^£) 
because  there  is  there  no  direct  reference  to  the  whole,  but  only  the  statement  that  at  the  death  of  her  husband,  she  and 
her  sous  were  left  behind- —  Tr.J 

EXJSGEi'ICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL.  | nite  is  herteby  ^pressed  than  that  the  occurrence 

about  to  he  related  took  place  in  the  time  when 

Ver.    1.     And  it  came    to  pass   in  the  days    there  was  vet  no  king  in  Israel.     In  those  days 

when  the  judges  judged.      Nothing   more   defi- 1  there   was   no    governor   armed   with   imperative 


12 


THE  BOUK   OF   RUTH. 


authority,  who  could  help  and  discipline  the  whole 
people.  Everybody  did  what  he  would,  and  helped 
himself  in  whatever  way  he  thought  best.  Part 
of  the  tribe  of  Dan  forsook  the  land  in  a  body, 
because  they  were  no  longer  pleased  with  it,  and 
had  no  mind  to  overcome  the  remaining  enemies ; 
and  Elimelecb,  an  individual  citizen,  abandoned 
his  home  when  the  times  became  bad. 

There  was  a  famine  in  the  land.  No  rain 
fell,  and  the  crops  did  not  prosper.  Notwithstand- 
ing good  and  diligent  cultivation,  with  which  that 
at  present  observed  in  those  parts  is  not  to  be 
compared,  no  harvests  were  reaped  from  those 
extensive  grain-bearing  plains  which  in  good  years 
produce  abundant  supplies.1  In  such  seasons  of 
scarcity,  southern  Palestine  naturally  resorted  to 
importations  from  Egypt,  as  the  history  of  Joseph 
has  already  shown.  The  increased  prices,  how- 
ever, necessarily  resulting  from  a  failure  of  the 
home  crops,  pressed  with  two-fold  weight  on  the 
less  affluent  among  the  people.  And  if,  by  hostil- 
ities on  the  part  of  the  Philistines,  or  for  any  other 
reason,  they  were  also  cut  off  from  the  granaries 
of  Egypt,  nothing  remained  but  to  look  for  sup- 
plies t"  eastern  countries.  Even  ancient  Rome 
suffered  famine  whenever  its  connections  with 
Egypt  were  interrupted,  an  occurrence  which 
sometimes,  as  under  Vespasian  (Tacit,  iii.  48,  5), 
involved  serious  political  consequences. 

The  famine  extended  to  the  most  fertile  parts 
of  the  land,  for  it  visited  Bethlehem.  The  very 
name,  "  House  of  Bread,"  bespeaks  a  good  and 
fertile  district.  Even  yet,  notwithstanding  poor 
cultivation,  its  soil  is  fruitful  in  olives,  pomegran- 
ates, almonds,  figs,  and  grapes  (Ritter,  xvi.  287 
[Gage's  transl.  iii.  341]).  The  region  was  "re- 
markably well  watered  in  comparison  with  other 
parts  of  Palestine."2  On  this  account,  the  name 
Ephratah,  applied  to  Bethlehem  and  the  country 
around  it,  is  perhaps  to  be  explained  as  referring 
to  the  fruitfulness  insured  by  its  waters.3 

And  a  man  went.  The  man  left  Bethlehem 
with  his  family  in  the  time  of  famine,  in  order, 
[hiring  its  continuance,  to  sojourn  in  the  fertile 
territories  of  Moab,  on  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  whither  the  calamity  did  not  extend. 
For  this  the  Jewish  expositors  rightly  blame  him. 
He  left  his  neighbors  and  relatives  in  distress,  in 
order  to  live  in  the  land  of  the  enemy  ;  forsook  his 
home,  in  order  to  reside  as  a  stranger  in  Moab. 
If  what  he  did  was  right,  all  Bethlehem  should 
have  done  the  same  !  The  case  stood  very  differ- 
ent, when  Abraham  for  a  like  reason  went  to 
Egypt  (Gen.  xii.  10);  for  Abraham  went  with  all 
his  house,  left  no  one  behind,  and  was  everywhere 
a  stranger.  But  Isaac  is  already  forbidden  from 
adopting  the  same  method  of  relief  (Gen.  xxvi.  2), 
and  Jacob  removes  to  Egypt,  not  on  account  of  the 
famine,  but  because  his  lost  Joseph  has  been  found 
again.  But  this  man  undertakes,  by  his  own 
strength  and  in  selfish  segregation  from  his  fellows, 
to  change  the  orderings  of  divine  providence.  The 
famine  was  ordained  as  a  chastening  discipline; 
but  instead  of  repenting,  he  seeks  to  evade  it  by 

l  Ritter  (Erdlcunde,  xiii.  458)  states,  on  the  authority  of 
Burkhardt,  that  in  Nejd,  in  Arabia,  similar  famines  recur 
at  intervals  of  from  ten  to  fifteen  years. 

■1  Which  even  Benjamin  of  Tudela  (Asher'B  edit.  p.  40) 
particularly  notices. 

3  J~HCS.    nrpDN,  from    r"HQ,  to  bear,  «c.  fruit, 

TTV1  T     T  :    V  '  T  T 

ef.  mS,  Phrath,  in  its  Greek  form  Euphrates,  an  jTlQS, 
u  it  were. 


going  to  a  foreign  land.  Whether  ibis  can  be 
done,  the  ensuing  narrative  is  about  to  show. 

Ver.  2.  And  the  name  of  the  man  was 
Elimelech.  His  family  was  of  importance  in  the 
tribe  of  Judah  (cf.  chaps,  ii.  and  iii.),  well  known 
in  Bethlehem  (eh.  i.  19  ft'.;  iv.  1  ft'.),  and  by  no 
means  poor  (ch.  i.  21).  The  names  of  its  mem- 
bers may  be  held  to  testify  to  the  same  effect.  In 
accordance  with  the  spirit  of  Israelitish  life,  they 
may  be  supposed  to  reflect  those  obvious  peculiari- 
ties which  popular  discernment  remarked  in  the 
persons  of  those  who  bore  them.  The  man  is 
named  Elimelech,  "  my  God  is  King."  All  names 
compounded  with  "  melech,"  king,  with  which  we 
are  acquainted,  Abimelech,  Ahimelech,  etc.,  are 
borne  by  distinguished  persons.  Now,  it  was  pre- 
cisely in  contest  with  a  king  of  Moab,  Eglon,  that 
Israel  had  experienced  that  God  is  king  ;  and  yet, 
here  an  Elimelech  withdraws  himself  from  the 
favor  of  God  in  order  to  live  in  Moab  !  His  wife's 
name  was  Naomi,  "  the  lovely,  gracious  one."  The 
name  unquestionably  corresponded  to  the  charac- 
ter. Whoever  is  loved  as  she  was,  and  that  by 
daughters-in-law,  is  most  certainly  worthy  of  love. 
As  to  the  names  of  the  sons,  Mahlon  and  Chilion, 
the  derivations  which  make  them  signify  "  sickly  " 
and  "pining,"  suggested  perhaps  by  their  subse- 
quent fate,  are  undoubtedly  erroneous.  For, 
surely,  they  bore  them  already  when  in  Bethle- 
hem, after  leaving  which  they  continued  in  life 
over  ten  years  in  Moab.  It  is  much  more  likely 
that  by  these  names,  bestowed  at  birth,  the  parents 
expressed  the  feeling  that  these  sons  were  their 
"joy  "  and  "  ornament."   Mahlon  (properly  Mach- 

lon)  may  then  be  derived  from  '"fl2,  machol, 
"  circle-dance,"  Greek  choroS'  Comp.  1  Kgs.  iv.  31, 
where  Heman,  Chalcol,  and  Darda,  are  called  sons 
of  Machol  ;  and  in  Greek,  Choreyis  or  Chorokles, 
from  choros.     In  like  manner,  Chilion*  (or  rathei 

Ktlion),  may,  like  n?3,  kallah,  a  bride,  be  re- 
ferred to  -V^i  to  crown.  The  name  would  thus 
signify  caronatus,  just  as  k-allah  (bride)  signifies  a 
coronata.  It  is  particularly  stated  that  they  are 
"  Ephrathites  "  of  Bethlehem-judah.  Ephratah 
was  the  ancient  name  of  Bethlehem  and  the  region 
around  it.  Accordingly,  Ephrathites  are  natives 
of  the  city,  persons  properly  belonging  to  the  tribe 
of  Judah,  not  mere  residents  in  Bethlehem  from 
other  tribes  (cf.  Judg.  xvii.  7).5  So  David  also,  by 
a  use  of  the  word  in  obvious  accord  with  this  pas- 
sage, is  spoken  of  as  the  son  of  an  Ephrathite 
of  Bethlehem-judah  (1  Sam.  xvii.  12);  and  the 
prophet,  when  he  announces  Him  who  in  the 
future  is  to  come  out  of  Bethlehem,  expressly 
speaks  of  Bethlehem-Ephratah  (Micah  v.  1 ).  For 
the  same  reason,  the  full  name  Bethlehem-judah  is 
constantly  used,  in  order  to  prevent  any  confusion 
with  Bethlehem  in  Zebulun  (josh.  xix.  15 ;  cf.  Com. 
on  Judg.  xii.  8).  and  also  to  make  it  impossible  to 
think  of  Ephrathites  of  the  tribe  of  Ephraim. 

Vers.  3-5.  And  Elimelech  died.  Probably 
not  long  after  his  arrival  in  Moab.     This  appears 

4  Sept.  XeAaiioi',  Josephus  XcXAtW.  The  magnificence 
of  the  names  might  rather  seem  to  contrast  with  the  un- 
happy issue.  For  Elimelech  Josephus  puts  Abimelech, 
probably  also  in  consequence  of  some  allegorical  exposi- 
tion. 

5  Some  of  the  older  Jewish  teachers  not  inappropriately 
render  ft  Ephratim  "  by  eu-yeve'craroi,  high-born,  oi  lata 
tini  (Ruth  Rabba,  29.  Bte  ). 


CHAPTER  I.   1-6. 


13 


not  onlv  fiom  the  connecting  "  and  " :  "  they 
came  to'  Moab,  were  there,  and  Elimelech  died" 
(cf.  the  Com.  on  Judg.  i.  1),  but  may  also  be 
inferred  from  the  circumstance  that  the  sons  did 
not  marry  while  he  was  yet  living. 

The  death  of  the  father  is  the  beginning  of  the 
sad  catastrophe  ;  hut  notwithstanding  its  occurrence 
the  sons  are  unwilling  to  return.  On  the_  contrary, 
they  proceed,  in  violation  of  the  Mosaic  law,  to 
take  Moabitish  wives  (cf  Com.  on  Judg.  iii.  6  f.). 
That  such  marriages  fall  within  the  prohibition  of 
Deut.  vii.  3  is  not  "to  be  doubted.  The  restrictions 
of  that  passage  apply  to  all  who  serve  false  gods, 
and  the  idolatry  of  Ammon  and  Moab  is  as 
strongly  abominated  as  any  other.  That  Moab 
and  Ammon  are  not  expressly  named  in  the  pas- 
sage, is  owing  to  the  fact  that  it  speaks  with  ref- 
erence to  the  country  on  this  side  of  the  Jordan. 
In  other  passages,  the  worship  and  fellowship  of 
Moab  are  rejected  in  the  same  way  as  those  of 
the  other  nations  (cf.  Judg.  x.  6).  The  ques- 
tion is  not  what  name  a  people  bears,  but  what 
ts  religion  and  worship  are.  No  doubt,  how- 
ever, the  old  Jewish  expositors  are  right  when 
they  maintain  that  the  law  which  forbids  the  en- 
trance of  an  Ammonite  or  Moabite  into  the  con- 
gregation of  Jehovah,  even  to  the  tenth  genera- 
tion (Deut.  xxiii.  3),  does  not  bear  on  the  case  of 
Ruth.  For  this  can  apply  only  to  men,  who  from 
their  sex  are  enabled  to  act  independently,  not  to 
women,  who  are  selected  and  taken.  A  woman 
founded  no  family  in  Israel,  but  was  taken  into 
one.  For  that  reason,  also,  there  is  no  connection 
whatever  between  this  law  and  that  in  Deut.  vii. 
2  ff.  Israel  was  forbidden  to  take  wives  for  their 
sons  from  among  the  neighboring  nations,  not 
because  these  entered  into  the  congregation  or 
founded  strange  families,  hut  because  marriage  is 
a  covenant,  and  involves  the  danger  of  becoming 
mixed  up  with  idolatry. 

Inapplicable,  likewise,  to  the  present  case  is 
the  passage  in  Deut.  xxi.  10  ff.,  adduced  by  Le 
Clerc  in  defense  of  Naomi's  sons.  Doubtless,  the 
fact  that  a  woman  was  a  captive  taken  in  war  gave 
marriage  with  her  an  altogether  different  charac- 
ter. In  that  case  all  the  presuppositions  which 
underlie  the  enactment  in  Deut.  vii.  were  want- 
ing. The  womau,  moreover,  must  first  bewail  her 
kindred  as  dead,  before  she  is  allowed  to  be  mar- 
ried. But  Ruth  and  Orpah  were  not  captives. 
Marriage  with  them  was  in  all  respects  such  as 
Deut.  vii.  provided  against.  Nor  does  the  narra- 
tive seek  to  hide  the  sin  of  the  young  men.1  It  is 
precisely,  as  we  shall  see,  the  most  striking  beauty 
of  the  thought  of  our  Book,  that  the  wrong  which 
has  been  done  is  overcome,  and  turned  into  a  step- 
ping-stone to  a  great  end.  The  Midrash  makes  a 
daughter  of  king  Eglon  out  of  Ruth.  Her  heart 
at  least  is  noble  and  royal  as  any  king's  daughter 
could  be,  and  her  exterior  was  doubtless  such  as 
to  correspond  with  it. 

The  name  of  the  one  was  Orpah,  and  the 
name  of  the  other  Buth.  The  designation  of 
girls  by  names  borrowed  from  pleasing  animals  or 

i  The  Targum  justly  brings  it  into  full  relief.  [It  para- 
phrases :  (t  and  they  transgressed  the  command  of  the  Lord, 
and  took  foreign  wives  from  among  the  daughters  of  Moab.M] 
The  answers  of  Le  Clerc  are  misunderstandings,  which  have 
been  repeated  down  to  Bertheau.  Ranibach's  excuses  for 
the  brothers  are  already  offered  by  older  Roman  Catholic 
expositors.  "  But,1'  says  one  of  these  (cf.  Serarius,  p.  690), 
"  why  make  excuses  for  them  ?  for  Scripture  does  in  no 
way  represent  them  as  holy  men." 

1    Li"V11    is  usually  regarded  as  a  contraction  either  of 


flowers  is  common  to  all  nations.  The  conjecture 
that  Orpah,  or  Orpha,  as  the  LXX.  pronounce  it, 
like  Ophra,  signifies  a  hind,  is  therefore  undoubt 
edly  in  accordance  with  Moabitish  usage.  A 
comparison  might  apparently  be  made  with  cerva, 
Celtic  carv  (cf.  Benfey,  ii.  174).  The  name  of 
Ruth  would  gain  in  interest,  if  the  derivation 
which  I  propose,  were  approved.  Singularly 
enough  the  name  of  the  rose  is  not  mentioned  in 
the  Scriptures,  although  this  flower  to  this  day 
adorns  the  ruins  of  the  holy  land  with  wondrous 
beauty.  The  Mishna  and  Talmud  speak  of  it 
under  its  Greek  name,  p6iov  (cf.  my  Rose  unci 
Nachtigall,  p.  19).     Now  it  seems  to  me  that  in 

jTH  we  have  the  ancient  form  of  the  word  ji6Sov, 
rosa,  undoubtedly  derived  from  the  redness  of  the 
flower,  4pv8pis,  rutilus,  Sanskrit  ritdh-ira,  Gothic 
rauds  (Benfey,  ii.  125).  That  even  the  so-called 
Semitic  and  classical  languages  have  many  words 
and  roots  in  common,  especially  such  as  denote 
common  objects,  as  colors,  animals,  plants,  is  mani- 
fest from  numerous  instances,  as  e.  g.  a\(p6s,  albus, 

137.  At  all  events,  the  thought  of  Ruth  as  the 
Moabitish  Rose  is  in  itself,  apart  from  the  philolog- 
ical probability,  too  attractive  to  refrain  from  giv- 
ing expression  to  the  conjecture.2 

And  they  dwelt  there  about  ten  years.  The 
selection  of  such  maidens  as  the  sequel  shows 
Ruth  and  Orpah  to  be,  and  the  peaceful  relations 
which  must  nave  existed  between  all  parties  con- 
cerned, may  perhaps  be  allowed  to  reduce  the 
offense  of  Naomi's  sons  against  the  marriage  law  to 
its  mildest  form.  But  the  distance  at  which  they 
keep  themselves  from  their  native  land  and  people 
when  these  are  in  distress,  in  order  to  find  happi- 
ness and  rest  for  themselves  elsewhere,  does  not 
prove  productive  of  blessings.  The  lot  that  be- 
falls them  is  very  sad.  The  father,  who  feared  lest 
he  should  not  be  able  to  live  at  home,  had  scarcely 
reached  the  strangers'  land  before  he  died.  The 
sons  founded  their  houses  in  Moab,  and  Moab  be- 
came their  grave.  They  were  probably  determined 
not  to  return  home  before  the  famine  was  over ; 
and  when  it  was  over,  they  themselves  were  no 
more.  The  father  had  emigrated  in  order  to  have 
more  and  to  secure  his  family  ;  and  now  his  widow 
had  neither  husband,  nor  sous,  nor  property. 
Mahlon  and  Chilion  had  died  childless  ;  "joy  "  and 
"  ornament "  had  given  way  to  mourning  and  the 
signs  of  bereavement  —  Naomi  stood  alone  in  a 
foreign  land.  Then  she  arose  with  her  daughters- 
in-law. 

Ver.  6.  For  Jehovah  had  visited  his  people 
to  give  them  bread.  Believing  Israel  sees  the 
government  of  God  in  everything.  Everything 
comes  from  Him  and  is  designed  to  discipline  and 
instruct  mankind.  In  Deut.  xxviii.  47,  48,  it  is 
written  that  in  case  Israel  shall  apostatize  from 
God  and  cease  to  serve  Him,  it  shall  serve  its  ene- 
mies, and  that  in  hunger  and  thirst,  in  nakedness 
and  want.  That  the  famine  which  had  at  this 
time  befallen  Bethlehem  was  the  consequence  of 
one  of  those  military  tyrannies  which,  as  the  Book 

JTftO,    vision,  appearance,  or  better,  of  f"W1     female 

friend.     The  explanation  of  HC^V  as  hind,  rests  on  the 

supposition  that  it  is  the  same  with  n"12V,  the  two  mid- 
dle letters  being  transposed.  Geseniua  derives  it  from  the 
Arabic  'Orphun,  a  mane  ;  cf.  the  Heb.  ?Yy2,  neck.  "  It 
may,  however,  be  more  suitable,"  says  Wright,  tr  as  the 
name  of  a  female,  to  regard  it  as  identical  with  the  Arabl* 
'  Orphun  in  the  sense  of  liberality."  —  Tr.] 


14 


THE   BOOK   Ob    RUTH. 


of  Judges  relates,  chastised  the  people,  there  is 
not  the  least  indication.  But  a  chastisement  it 
certainly  was,  even  though  this  is  not  asserted. 
And  doubtless,  the  people,  as  it  usually  did  under 
such  einumstances,  tnrned  with  penitence  and 
prayer  to  its  God.  Then  the  years  of  famine  came 
to  an  end.  God  remembered  his  people.  It  is  a 
judgment  of  God  when  He  allows  men  to  go  their 
own  ways  and  help  themselves  in  their  necessities 
and  sufferings  (cf.  the  imeptb'tbv,  Acts,  xvii.  30)  ; 
but  in  his  mercy  He  remembers  them,  as  he  re- 
membered Israel  in  Egypt  (Ex.  ii.  24).    The  word 

"T|23  here  used,  occurs  repeatedly  for  such  a  re- 
turn of  divine  remembrance.  God  remembered 
<T:3)  Sarah,  silently  mourning  over  her  childless- 
ness (Gen.  xxi.  1).  After  Moses  had  performed 
wonders  before  Israel  in  Egypt,  the  people  believed, 

and  when  they  heard  that  God  had  observed  ("Tf2") 
the  sufferings  of  the  people,  and  had  looked  upon 
their  affliction,  they  bowed  down  and  worshipped 
(Ex.  iv.  31) 

From  the  turn  of  the  language  that  God  "  re- 
membered "  to  "  give  bread"  to  his  people,  more 
particularly  to  Bethlehem,  the  "  House  of  Bread," 
it  may  properly  be  inferred  that  the  famine  was 
not  the  result  of  war,  but  of  drought. 

Note  on  Bethlehem  and  the  grate  of 
Rachel.  "  No  one,"  say?  Robinson  {Bihl.  Res.  i. 
471),  has  ever  doubted,  1  believe,  that  the  present 
Beit  Lahm,  '  House  of  Flesh.'  of  the  Arabs,  is 
identical  with  the  ancient  Bethlehem,  '  House  of 
Bread,'  of  the  Jews.  The  present  distance  of  two 
hours  from  Jerusalem  corresponds  very  exactly  to 
the  six  Roman  miles  of  antiquity."  Schubert 
justly  calls  it  the  most  attractive  and  significant 
of  all  the  world's  birthplaces. 

This  Bethlehem,  where  Rachel  died,  where  Boaz 
married  Ruth,  where  David  was  born,  and  Jesus 
Christ  entered  the  world,  is  to-day,  as  Ritter  re- 
marks, a  little  city  or  village  "  hardly  worthy  of 
mention  on  its  own  account,  having  scarcely  a 
single  noteworthy  characteristic,  except  the  un- 
changing carpet  of  green,  and  the  beautiful  sky 
from  which  once  the  glory  of  the  Lord  shone 
round  about  the  shepherds." 

Bethlehem  lies  two  short  hours  south  of  Jerusa- 
lem, on  two  moderate-sized  hills,  on  whose  north- 
ern and  eastern  declivities  the  dwelling-houses 
of  the  place  are  built.  It  is  bounded  on  the  south 
by  the  Wady  et  Taamirah.  During  the  reign  of 
the  emperor  Justinian  it  flourished  greatly  for  a 
season,  which,  however,  did  not  prove  long.  Its 
present  inhabitants  are  mostly  Christians.  They 
are  a  strong  and  energetic  race.  During  the 
Middle  Ages,  warlike  feuds  seem  to  have  given  the 
place  a  better  title  to  be  called  Bethlachem,  House 
of  War.  than  Bethlehem. 

Toward  the  west,  there  is  a  succession  of  irregu- 
lar hills  and  valleys  as  far  as  the  chapel  over 
Rachel's  sepulchre.  The  Jews  considered  this  as 
an  especially  sacred  spot.1  The  monument  is  de- 
scribed by  Benjamin  of  Tudela,  who  visited  Pales- 
tine somewhere  between  a.  d.  1160  and  1173, 
is  consisting  of  "  eleven  stones,  according  to  the 
number  of  the  sons  of  Jacob,  with  a  cupola  resting 

1  [They  do  still.  Dr.  Hackett,  who  visited  the  tomb  in 
1852.  says  :  "  The  .lews,  as  would  be  expected,  regard  the 
spot  with  peculiar  interest.  One  of  them  filled  a  bag  with 
tarth  collected  near  the  comb,  aud  gave  it  to  one  of  my 
travelling  companions  to  bring  home  with  liiin  to  this 
sountry,  as  a  present  to  a  brother  of  the  .tew  residing  here' 


on  four  pillars  over  them ;  and  all  passing  Jewa 
write  their  names  on  the  stones  of  the  monument " 
(ed.  Asher,  p.  40).  The  Jewish  traveller  Petachia 
(circa  a.  d.  1175-80),  writes  as  follows:  "Eleven 
stones  lie  on  the  grave  of  Rachel,  according  to  the 
eleven  tribes,  for  Benjamin  was  only  born  as  his 
mother  died.  The  stones  are  of  marble  ;  and  the 
stone  of  Jacob,  also  marble,  covers  all  the  others, 
and  is  very  large,  so  that  it  requires  many  persons 
to  move  it."  This  induces  the  author  to  add  the 
following  legend  :  "  The  monks  who  live  a  mile 
away,  once  took  the  stone  from  the  grave,  and  de- 
posited it  by  their  church ;  but  the  next  morning 
they  saw  it  again  at  the  grave  as  before  "  (ed. 
Carmoly,  p.  97). 

The  author  of  Jichus  ha  Abot  gives  a  description 
of  the  cupola  as  it  was  in  his  time  (cf.  Hottmger, 
Cippi  Hebraici,  p.  33,  Carmoly,  Itineraires,  etc., 
p.  436).  The  Arabian  traveller  Edrisi  (about 
a.  d.  1150:  ed.  Janbert,  i.  345)  and  another  anon- 
ymous writer  [Fundgruben  des  Orients,  ii.  135; 
Carmoly,  p.  457)  also  speak  of  it. 

Buckingham's  description  (a.  r>-  1816)  is  as  fol- 
lows :  "  We  entered  it  on  the  south  side  by  an 
aperture  through  which  it  was  difficult  to  crawl,  as 
it  has  no  doorway,  and  found  on  the  inside  a  square 
mass  of  masonry  in  the  centre,  built  up  from  the 
floor  nearly  to  the  roof,  and  of  such  a  size  as  to 
leave  barely  a  narrow  passage  for  walking  around 
it.  It  is  plastered  with  white  stucco  on  the  outer 
surface,  and  is  sufficiently  large  and  high  to  enclose 
within  it  any  ancient  pillar  that  might  have  been 
found  on  the  grave  of  Rachel.  Around  the  in- 
terior face  of  the  walls  is  an  arched  recess  on  each 
side,  and  over  every  part  of  the  stucco  are  written 
and  engraved  a  profusion  of  names,  in  Hebrew, 
Arabic,  and  Roman  characters."  (Cf.  Palestine,  i. 
336. ) 

H0MILETI0AL  AND  PRACTICAL.! 

"  A  man  of  Bethkhem-jitdah  went  to  sojourn  in 
Moab."  Because  there  is  famine  at  home,  the 
family  of  Elimelech  migrate  to  a  foreign  country. 
They  alone  think  that  the  distress  cannot  be  borne. 
Instead  of  crying  to  God  and  trusting  in  Him, 
along  with  their  brethren,  in  Bethlehem,  they  pro- 
ceed to  an  enemy's  land,  where  heathen  worship 
false  god-.  Their  emigration  testifies  to  a  decrease 
in  their  faith.  Here  it  is  not.  as  in  the  case  of 
Abraham,  Go  to  a  land  that  I  will  show  thee  :  but 
it  must  rather  be  said,  They  went  to  a  land  that 
God  had  rejected.  The  result  was  such  as  mignt 
have  been  expected.  God  did  not  bless  their  de- 
parture, and  therefore  their  entrance  brought  no 
joy-  They  sought  to  avoid  one  affliction,  and  fell 
into  a  heavier.  The  men  escaped  famine,  but  death 
overtook  them.  They  had  not  trusted  God's  love 
at  home,  and  so  his  judgments  smote  them  abroad. 

Results  like  these  should  also  be  contemplated  by 
many  who  undertake  to  emigrate  in  our  days.  Not 
many  go  as  Abraham  went  to  Canaan,  or  as  Jacob 
went  to  Egypt;  the  majority  follow  in  the  steps  of 
Elimelech. 

Continue  in  thy  land,  and  support  thyself  hon- 
estly. "  To  many  "  —  says  a  book  called  Sabbat- 
lirhe  JSrinnerungen,  —  "it  may  be  a  necessity  to 
leave  their  native  land,  for  the  relations  of  life  are 

See  Scripture  Illustrations,  Boston,  1855,  p.  102,  where  a 
small  engraving  of  the  present  exterior  of  the  sepulchre 
is  al-o  given  — Tr.] 

•1  [Compare  the  Introduction,  Sect.  6,  for  some  general 
Homiletical  Hints  on  the  whole  Book. — Tr.] 


CHAPTER   I.    1-6. 


i: 


manifold  and  often  strange  ;  but  most  of  those 
sno  in  these  days  seize  the  pilgrim-start',  are  not 
driven  by  distress.  It  is  not  hunger  after  bread, 
or  want  of  work  that  urges  them,  but  hunger 
ifter  gain,  and  the  want  of  life  in  God."  l 

Starke  :  Dearth  and  famine  are  a  great  plague, 
and  we  have  good  reason  to  pray  with  reference 
in  th  -m,  "  Good  Lord,  deliver  us  !  " 

tr  is  true,  indeed,  that  Elimelech  emigrated  to  a 
It  a [h -ii  land,  where  the  living  God  was  not  ac- 
knowledged, while  emigrants  of  the  present  day 
go  for  the  most  part  to  lands  where  churches  are 
already  in  existence.  But.  on  the  other  hand, 
Elimelech.  notwithstanding  his  unbelieving  flight, 
became  alter  all  no  Moabite.  The  emigrant's 
grand  concern  should  be  not  to  have  the  spirit  of 
a  Moabite  when  he  leaves  bis  native  land.  Many 
have  ended  much  more  sadly  than  Elimelech,  and 
have  left  no  name  behind  Elimelech's  kindred  was 
vet  visited  with  blessings,  because  the  faithful. 
Relieving  spirit  of  an  Israelitish  woman,  Naomi, 
worked  in  his  household. 

Starke  :  Husband  and  wife  should  continue  true 
to  each  other,  in  love  and  in  sorrow,  in  good  and 
evil  days. 

"  And  the  name  of  his  wife  was  Naomi."  Naomi 
means,  "  pleasant,  lovely."  As  her  name,  so  her 
character.  Her  name  was  the  mirror  of  her  na- 
ture. And  truly,  names  ought  not  to  be  borne  in 
vain  [Killer  :  Names  are  given  to  men  and  wo- 
men, not  only  to  distinguish  them  from  each  other, 
but  also,  —  1.  To  stir  them  up  to  verify  the  mean- 
ings and  significations  of  their  names.  Wherefore 
let  every  Obadiah  strive  to  be  a  "  servant  of  God," 
every  Nathaniel  to  be  "  a  gift  of  God,"  Onesimus 
lo  be  "  profitable,"  every  Roger  "  quiet  and  peace- 
able" (?)  Robert  "famous  for  counsel"  (!),  and 
William  "a  help  and  defense  "  to  many.  2.  To 
incite  them  to  imitate  the  virtues  of  those  worthy 
persons  who  formerly  have  been  bearers  and  own- 
i  r-  of  their  names.  Let  all  Abrahams  be  faithful. 
Isaacs  quiet,  Jacobs  painful,  Josephs  chaste  ;  every 
Lewis,  pious  ;  Edward,  confessor  of  the  true  faith  : 
William,  conqueror  over  his  own  corruptions.  Let 
them  also  carefully  avoid  those  sins  for  which  the 
bearers  of  the  names  stand  branded  to  posterity. 
Let  every  Jonah  beware  of  frowardness,  Thomas 
of  distrustfulness,  etc.  If  there  be  two  of  our 
names,  one  exceedingly  good,  the  other  notoriously 
evil,  let  us  decline  the  vices  of  the  one,  and  prac- 
tice the  virtues  of  the  either.  Let  every  Judas  not 
follow  Judas  Iseariot,  who   betrayed  our  Saviour, 

1  [Without  questioning  the  correctness  of  the  foregoing 
remarks .  it  may  nevertheless  serve  a  good  purpose  to  call 
attention  to  the  following  sentences  from  Dr.  Thos.  Fuller 
(1654),  which  read  to-day  surest  the  great  need  of  that 
caution  in  "  application  "  which  they  also  exemplify  :  ''  Now 
if  any  .1#  demand  of  me  my  opinion  concerning  our  breth- 
ren which  of  late  left  this  kingdom  to  advance  a  plantation 
In  Xew  England ;  surely  I  think,  as  St.  Paul  said  concern- 
ing virgius  he.  had  "  received  no  commandment  from  the 
Lord  : '  so  I  cannot  find  any  just  warrant  to  encourage  men 
it  undertake  this  removal ;  but  think  rather  the  counsel 


but  Judas  the  brother  of  James,  the  writer  of  the 
General  Epistle  ;  each  Demetrius  not  follow  him 
in  the  Acts  who  made  silver  shrines  for  Diana,  but 
Demetrius,  3  John,  ver.  12,  who  had  "  agood  report 
of  all  men  ;  "  every  Ignatius  not  imitate  Ignatius 
Loyola,  the  lame  father  of  blind  obedience,  but  Ig- 
natius, the  worthy  martyr  in  the  primitive  church. 
And  if  it  should  chance,  through  the  indiscretion 
of  parents  and  godfathers,  that  a  bad  name  should 
be  imposed  on  any,  0  let  not  "  folly  "  be  "  with  " 

them,  because  Nabal  is  their  name In 

the  days  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  there  was  a  royal 
ship  called  "  The  Revenge,"  which,  having  main- 
tained a  long  fight  against  a  fleet  of  Spaniards 
(wherein  eight  hundred  great  shot  were  discharged 
against  her),  was  at  last  fain  to  yield ;  but  no 
sooner  were  her  men  gone  ont  of  her,  and  two 
hundred  fresh  Spaniards  come  into  her,  but  she 
suddenly  sunk  them  and  herself;  and  so  "  The  Re- 
venge "  was  revenged.  Shall  lifeless  pieces  of  wood 
answer  the  names  which  men  impose  upon  them, 
and  shall  not  reasonable  souls  do  the  same?  —  Tr.]. 

[Bp.  Hall  :  Betwixt  the  reign  of  the  judges, 
Israel  was  plagued  with  tyranny;  and  while  some 
of  them  reigned,  with  famine.  Seldom  did  that 
rebellious  people  want  somewhat  to  humble  them. 
One  rod  is  not  enough  for  a  stubborn  child. 

Fuller  :  The  prodigal  child  complained,  "  How 
many  hired  servants  of  my  father  have  bread 
enough,  and  I  die  for  hunger !  "  So  here  we  see 
that  the  uncircumcized  Moabites,  God's  slaves  and 
vassals,  had  plenty  of  store,  whilst  Israel,  God's 
children  (but  his  prodigal  children,  which  by 
their  sins  had  displeased  their  Heavenly  Father), 
were  pinched  with  penury. 

The  same  :  Let  us  not  abuse  strangers,  and 
make  a  prey  of  them,  but  rather  let  us  be  courteous 
unto  them,  lest  the  barbarians  condemn  us,  who 
so  courteously  entreated  St.  Paul,  with  his  ship- 
wrecked companions,  and  the  Moabites  in  my  text, 
who  suffered  Elimelech,  when  he  came  into  the 
land,  to  continue  there. 

The  same  :  "  And  Elimelech  died."  I  have 
seldom  seen  a  tree  thrive  that  hath  been  trans- 
planted when  it  was  old. 

The  same  :  "  And  she  was  left,  and  her  two 
sons."  Here  we  see  how  mercifully  God  dealt 
with  Naomi,  in  that  He  quenched  not  all  the  sparks 
of  her  comfort  at  once,  but  though  He  took  away 
the  stock.  He  left  her  the  stems.  Indeed,  after- 
wards He  took  them  away  also  ;  but  first  He  pro- 
vided her  with  a  gracious  daughter-in-law.  —  Tr.] 

best  that  king  Joash  prescribed  to  Amaziah.  '  Tarry  at 
home  '  Yet  as  for  those  that  are  already  gone,  far  be  i* 
from  us  to  conceive  them  to  be  such  to  whom  we  may  not 
say,  '  God  speed."  as  it  is  in  2  John  verse  10  :  but  let  us 
pity  them,  and  pray  for  them  ;  for  sure  they  have  no  need 
of  our  mocks,  which  I  am  afraid  have  too  much  of  their 
own  miseries.  I  conclude  therefore  of  the  two  Englands, 
what  our  Saviour  saitu  of  the  two  wines,  Lube  v  39  :  f  N« 
man  having  tasted  of  the  old  presertly  desireth  the  D*w 
for  he  saith,  The  old  is  better.'  "  —  Tr.) 


16  THE   BOOK  OF   RUTH. 


Verses  7-18. 
Faithfulness  until  Death. 

7  Wherefore  [And]  she  went  forth  out  of  the  place  where  she  was,  and  her  twc 
daughters-in-law  with  her ; 1  and  they  [already]  went  on  the  way  to  return  unto  the 

8  land  of  Judah.  And  Naomi  said  [Then  s;tid  Naomi]  unto  her  two  daughters-in-law. 
Go,  return  each  to  her  mother's  house:  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  deal  kindly  with  you." 

9  as  ye  have  dealt  with  the  dead,  and  with  me.  The  Lord  [Jehovah]  grunt  you  that 
ye  may  find  8  rest  [a  resting-place],  each  of  you  in  the  house  of  her  husband.    Then 

10  she  kissed  them ;  and  they  lifted  up  their  voice,  and  wept.     And  they  said  unto  her, 

11  Surely4  we  will  return  with  thee  unto  thy  people.  And  Naomi  said.  Turn  again 
[Return],  my  daughters :  why  will  ye  go  with  me  ?   are  there  yet  any  more  sons  in 

12  my  womb,  that  they  may  be  your  husband?  ?  Turn  again  [Return],  my  daughters, 
go  your  way  [omit :  your  way]  ;  for  I  am  too  old  to  have  [to  belong  (again)  to]  an 
husband.     If  [Even  if]  I  should  say,5  I  have  hope,  if  I  should  have  [should  belong 

13  to]  an  husband  also  to-night,  and  should  also  bear  sons  ;  would  ye  [then]  6  tarry  for 
them  [omit :  for  them]  till  they  were  grown  ?  would  ye  stay  for  them  [would  you 
then  shut  yourselves  up]  from  having  husbands  [in  order7  (after  all)  not  o  belong 
to  a  husband]?  nay,  my  daughters;  tor  it  grieveth  me  much  fir  your  sakes  [it  is 
much  more  bitter  to  me  than  to  you],8  that  [since]  the  hand  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 

14  is  gone  out  against  me.  And  they  lifted  up  their  voice,  and  wept  again.9  And 
1  />   Orpali  kissed  her  mother-in-law  [and  turned  back]  ;  but  Ruth  clave  unto  her.      And  she 

[Naomi]  said.   Behold,  thy  sister-in-law  is  gone  back  unto  her  people,  and  unto  her 

16  gods  [God]:10  return  thou  [also]  after  thy  sisier-in-law.  And  Ruth  said,  Entreat 
[Urge]  me  not  to  leave  thee,  or  [and]  to  return  from  following  after  thee:  for 
whither  thou   goest,   I    will  go ;  and  where   ihou   lodge>t   [abidest],   I    will    lodge 

17  [abide]:  thy  people  shall  be  [is]  my  people,  and  thy  God  my  God:  Where  thou 
diest,  will  I  die,  and  there  will  I  be  buried  :  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  do  so  to  me,  and 

18  more  also,  if11  aught  but  death  part  thee  and  me.  When  [And  when]  she  saw 
that  -he  was  steadfastly  minded  to  go  with  her,  then  she  left  speaking  unto  [ceased  to 

dissuade]  her, 

TEXTUAL   AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  7.  —  From  this  verse,  and  the  preceding  (cf.  also  ver.  10).  it  appears  plain,  as  Bertheau  remark?,  that  not  only 
Naomi,  but  also  both  her  daughters-in-law,  set  out  with  the  intention  of  going  to  Judah.  It  may  be  true  that  yaomi, 
determined  from  the  start  that  they  must  not  carry  out  this  intention,  rf  looked  upon  them  as  only  bearing  her  company 
for  a  while  before  parting  "  (Dr.  Cassel,  below)  ;  but  it  seems  at  least  as  likely  that  in  the  struggle  between  duty  and 
Inclination,  she  did  not  finally  reach  this  conclusion  until  the  moment  that  she  attempted  to  give  it  effect.     Tin 

D^IP  7  is  of  course  strictly  applicable  only  to  Naomi.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  8.  —  "T3n  E3S17  ^^^,  nt&2?>  :  lit-  Jehovah  do  kindness  with  you.  On  the  form  "ttTV*  as  opta- 
tive, cf.  Ges.  127,  3,  b.     Although  the  shortened  form  *">'*  is  more  usual,  its  substitution  by  the  Keri  is  unnecessary. 

In  C3!23?  the  suffix  is  masc,  although  referring  to  women,  cf.  also  C*"VtE?3?  'D  the  next  member  of  the  clause. 
Similar 'departures  from  strict  grammatical  propriety  occur  in  vers.  9,  11,  13,  19',  22,  ch.  iv.  11.  Gesenius  regards  them 
as  originally  colloquial  inaccuracies,  which  afterwards  passed  into  books,  §  121,  6,  Rem.  1.  All  but  two  ^ers.  19.  22)  of 
those  in  our  Hook  are  actually  found  in  conversations. 

[3  Ver  Q.  —  ]K"72;I.  imperat.  seriptio  defect,  for  HDS^i!?.  On  the  construction,  cf.  Ges  130,  1.  The  iniperat.  ii 
only  a  stronger  jussive,  hence  easily  connected  with  it.  —  Tr.] 

I*  Ver.  10.  —  *3  :  Dr.  Cassel  first  supplies  :  "  We  will  not  turn  back,"  and  then  renders  *3  by  denn,  "  for,"  cf  dm 
Ler.  8.  v.  s3,   B.  3,  b.    In  that  case,  however  (after  the  implied  negation),  sondern,  ff  but,"  would  be  better  than  ,:  for.T 

3ut  it  in  best  taken  like  in  in  N.  T.  before  words  directly  quoted,  cf.  Lex.  1.  c.  B.  1.  b.  Keil's  remark,  that  "  ^3  before 
words  in  direct  discourse  serves  to  strengthen,  being  almost  equal  to  an  assurance,"  is  certainly  not  true  in  all  cases,  cf 
t  Sam.  x.  19;  1  Kgs.  xi.  22.  —  Ta.] 

[5  Ver.  12  —  ^FHTDS  ^3  :  ^3  is  causal,  and  introduces  another  but  closely  connected  reason  (the  first,  also 
Introduced  by  ^3,  being  given  in  the  preceding  clause)  why  they  should  return,  cf.  Isa.  vi.  6 ;  Ps.  xxii.  12.  In  English 
w  should  represent  this  >3  —  ^3  by  "for  — and."   'P1QS,  TV,"!,  and   VI7-  i    are  all   conditional   perfect* 


CHAPTER   I.    7-18. 


17 


<nth  the  conditional  particle  omitted,  as  in  Ps.  lxix.  33  ;  ciii.  16  ;  Amos  iii.  8,  etc.  Cf.  Ew.  357  b.  In  English  we  might 
Imitate  the  sentence  thus :  rt  For  (let  us  suppose)  I  say.  I  have  hope ;  I  have  a  husband  ;  I  have  children  ;  will  you," 
etc.] 

[6  Ver.   13.  —  ]rOrT  is  the  fern,  suffix  *i"T,   used  as  a  neuter  (cf.  Ges.  107,  3),  with  prep,    y  and  the  interrogate 

n  :  "  under  these  circumstances,"  or  briefly  (t  then,"  as  inserted  in  the  text  after  Dr.  Cassel.  The  word  in  thi» 
6ense  is  not  unusual  in  Chaldee,  cf.  Dan.  ii.  6,  9,  24  ;  Ezn  v.  12.  In  Hebrew  it  is  found  again  at  Job  xxx.  24.  As  it 
occurs  here  in  the  colloquy  of  Naomi  with  her  daughters,  it  is  probably  to  be  regarded  as  a  word  current  in  the  language 
of  daily  life.  See  Keil,  [ntrod,  to  O.  T.  §  137,  2.  The  rendering  of  the  E.  V.  (after  Sept.,  Vulg.,  etc.),  "  for  them,"  is  very 
improbable,  both  on  account  of  the  position  of  the  word,  the  emphasis  being  clearly  on  "  wait,"  and  also  because  of  its 
fern,  suffix.  —  Tr.] 

[7  Ver.  13.  — ''fl/S,^,  lit.  "  to  not,"  Dr.  Cassel,  urn.  ''PI  73,7  expresses  negative  design,  as  ]^^7  positive. 
The  necessary  result  is  here  represented  as  designed,  cf.  the  use  of  IVa,  Win.  53,  10,  6.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  13.  —  230  1SJ3  ^  V"HD"^2  :  °r.  Cassel  interprets  rather  than  renders  :  "  for  I  am  much  worse  off  than 
you,  since  against  me,"  etc.  Substantially  the  same  rendering  is  given  by  Keil,  De  Wette,  Wright,  Wordsworth,  etc 
"  So  Sept.,  which  has  vjrkp  u/ias,  not  virep  vftiov,  and  so  Syr.  and  Arabic  "  (Wordsworth).  Bertheau,  like  E.  V.  takes 
C3Q  =  on  your  account,  for  your  sake.  The  objection  that  this  would  require  QJ^Vl'  instead  of  D3J2  (cf. 2 Sam. 
i.  26),  does  not  hold,  cf.  Prov.  v.  18  ;  Eccles.  ii.  10,  etc.  But  the  other  rendering  yields  a  better  sense  ~)Q  may  U 
adjective,   noun,  or  verb,   viz.  3   sing.  perf.   of  mt2,  used  impersonally. — Tr.] 

[9  Ver.  14.  —  T1J7:  Dr.  Cassel —"exceedingly."  But  there  is  no  good  reason  to  change  the  English  "ag»in;' 
referring  to  ver.  9.  — Tr.] 

[10  Ver.  IS. —  rPHvM.:  Sept.  and  Vulg.  render  by  the  plural,  "  gods."  Luther  has  the  sing.,  and  so  Dr.  Cassel. 
The  reference  is  apparently  to  the  national  deity  —  «  her  people  and  her  god  "  —  namely,  Chemosh  (Num.  xxi.  29) ; 
hence,  the  sing,  is  to  be  preferred.  It  seems  almost  superfluous  to  observe  that  Naomi's  words  do  not  necessarily  con- 
tain any  recognition  of  the  Moabitish  deity,  or  indicate  (as  Wright  suggests)  that  "  she  was  possibly  led  astray  by  the 
false  Idea  that  Jehovah  was  only  the  God  of  Israel."  Was  Jephthah,  then,  similarly  led  astray  (cf.  Judg  xi.  24  27)  ?  — 
Tr.] 

[11  Ver.  17.  —  ^3  is  not  "if"  (DS,  1  Sam.  iii.  17,  etc.),  but  "  that,"  cf.  1  Sam.  xiv.  44  ;  1  Kgs.  ii.  23.  >Fiy31t{M 
"I  swear,"  or  some  such  expression,  is  understood,  cf.  Gen.  xxii.  16.  The  E.  V.  might  be  corrected  by' leaving 
^3  untranslated,  and  rendering  :  "  only  death  shall  part  thee  and  me."  The  Hebrew,  instead  of  invoking  a  definite 
judgment  or  calamity  on  himself,  in  case  he  breaks  his  oath,  simply  says  713,  which  with  the  addition  "  and  more  too," 
is  perhaps  more  awful  to  the  imagination  because  it  is  not  definite.  — On  the  article  with  "  death,"  cf.  Ges.  109,  Rem. 
1.  c.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  7.  Arid  she  went  forth  out  of  the  place. 
The  place  is  not  named,  nor  is  it  necessary.  The 
Israelitish  family  had  after  all  not  become  nat- 
uralized in  it.  No  one  asks  Naomi  to  stay.  No 
one  accompanies  her,  save  her  two  daughters-in- 
law,  the  youthful  widows  of  her  too  early  faded 
sons. 

And  they  already  went  on  the  way.  Until 
then  Naomi  had  looked  on  her  daughters-in-law  as 
only  bearing  her  company  for  a  while  before  part- 
ing. But  being  now  far  from  their  place  of  resi- 
dence, on  the  highway  from  Moab  to  Judah,  she 
stops,  and  bids  them  return. 

Ver.  8.  Jehovah  deal  kindly  with  you,  as  ye 
have  dealt  with  the  dead  and  with  me.  A 
scene  now  begins  of  uncqualed  tenderness  and 
amiableness.  We  get  a  look  into  a  family-life  that 
may  serve  as  a  model  for  all.  It  is  an  honor  to 
the  deceased  sons,  Mahlon  and  Chilion,  that  they 
made  such  a  selection  of  wives  ;  but  they  must  also 
have  been  worthy  of  the  enduring  love  they  awak- 
ened, notwithstanding  that  there  were  no  children 
to  strengthen  the  bonds  of  affection.  The  attach- 
ment of  the  Moabitish  women,  Ruth  and  Orpah, 
to  their  new  family,  must  be  grounded  in  psycho- 
logical facts,  with  a  knowledge  of  which  exegesis 
cannot  dispense.  The  Moabitish  women  had  en- 
tered into  an  Israelitish  house,  and  had  breathed 
the  beneficent  atmosphere  of  a  family  of  Judah. 
Marriage  and  family  life  form  the  real  mirror  of 
religious  belief  and  worship.  Hence,  the  apostle, 
in  his  sublime  manner,  arranges  the  relations  of 
husband  and  wife  by  referring  to  the  love  of  Christ 
for  his  church  (Ephes.  v.  22  ff.).  Ancient  Israel, 
2 


therefore,  distinguished  itself  from  the  inhabitants 
of  Canaan,  not  merely  by  the  name  of  its  God,  but 
by  its  life  at  home  in  the  family,  by  faithfulness 
and  love  to  wife  and  child.  Purity  and  moralitv 
in  marriage  were  the  necessary  results  of  faith  iii 
the  only,  living  God,  as  much  as  a  life  of  unchaste 
and  sensual  pleasures  belonged  to  the  abomina- 
tions of  idolatry  among  the  Ammonites  and  Moab- 
ites.  Among  the  worst  sins  into  which  Israel  fell 
in  the  desert,  was  the  whoredom  with  the  daugh- 
ters of  Moab  in  the  service  of  Baal-Peor  (Num. 
xxv.)  ;  by  executing  summary  and  terrible  pun- 
ishment on  which.  Phinehas  the  priest  won  for 
himself  an  enduring  blessing.  The  Mosaic  law 
does  not  contain  special  and  extended  instructions 
as  to  the  treatment  of  wife  and  child.  But  the 
command,  "  thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery," 
stands  among  the  Sinaitic  Ten  as  the  reflection  of 
that  other  which  says.  "  thou  shalt  have  no  other 
gods."  An  affectionate,  moral  family  life  had 
become  an  Israelitish  characteristic  through  the 
influence  of  the  Israelitish  faith,  as  is  evident 
already  in  patriarchal  times  from  the  instances  of 
Sarah,  Rebecca,  Rachel  and  Leah.  But  it  showed 
itself  still  more  brightly  in  Israel  as  a  nation,  liv- 
ing by  the  side  of  other  tribes  in  Canaan,  since 
monogamy  had  become  its  natural  and  prevailing 
practice.  Every  profounder  apprehension  of  do 
mestic  relations,  brought  about  by  man's  cod 
sciousness  of  God,  affects  the  wife  especially.  She 
experiences  most  deeply  the  beneficence  of  a  life 
sanctified  by  the  law  of  God.  Her  happiness  and 
her  love,  indissolubly  connected,  depend  upon  the 
moral  education  of  the  man  she  follows.  Ruth 
and  Orpah  felt  the  impression  of  the  higher  moral- 


18 


THE   BOOK   OF  RUTH. 


itv  which,  in  contrast  with  the  Moabitish  home,  [ 
pervaded  every  Israelitish  household.  It  is  not  I 
necessary  to  conceive  of  Mahlon  and  Chilion  as 
men  of  eminence  in  this  respect;  but  they  held 
fat  to  their  famile  traditions,  according  to  which 
the  wife  occupied  a  position  of  tenderness,  pro- J 
tx  eted  by  love  and  solicitude.  They  did  not  act  in 
entire  accordance  with  the  law  when  they  married 
Moabitish  wives  ;  but  neither  did  they  unite  with 
them  in  the  idolatry  of  Baal-Peor.  Although  they 
may  not  have  been  specially  pious  and  god-fearing 
men,  their  national  mode  of  home  and  married 
life  nevertheless  contrasted  with  that  of  Moab,  and 
all  the  more  strongly  because  they  lived  in  the 
midst  of  Moab.  Both  the  young  women,  ac- 
quainted with  the  fate  of  Moabitish  marriages,  felt 
themselves  gratefully  attracted  to  the  Israelitish 
house  into  which  they  entered.  They  had  not  ac- 
cepted the  law  and  the  God  of  Israel ;  but  they  re- 
quited the  kind  and  tender  treatment  they  received 
with  equally  self-sacrificing  love.  That  Naomi 
can  acknowledge  this,  after  having  observed  them 
through  ten  years  of  married  life,  what  a  picture 
of  peace  and  happiness  does  it  suggest !  The 
women  had  not  only  heard  the  religion  of  Jehovah 
confessed  in  Moab  (cf.  the  expression  :  Jehovah 
deal  kindly  with  you,  etc.),  but  they  had  seen  the 
expression  of  it  in  the  life.  What  they  have  done 
and  are  yet  ready  to  do,  is  the  consequence  thereof. 
For  national  divisions,  we  here  see,  are  overcome 
rather  by  the  preaching  of  the  life  than  by  the 
verbal  proclamation  of  doctrine. 

Naomi  praises  not  only  the  love  which  Ruth  and 
Orpah  have  manifested  toward  their  husbands, 
but  also  that  which  they  have  shown  towards  her- 
self, the  mother-in-law.  And  this  is  yet  more 
noteworthy.  Ancients  and  moderns  unite  in  com- 
plaints of  the  unhappy  relations  between  daugh- 
ters- and  mothers-in-law.  Plutarch,  treating  of  the 
duties  of  married  persons,  relates  that  in  Leptis,  in 
Africa,  it  was  customary  for  the  bride  on  the  day 
after  the  wedding  to  send  to  the  bridegroom's 
mother  to  ask  for  a  pot,  which  the  latter  refuses, 
pretending  that  she  has  none,  in  order  that  the 
young  wife  may  speedily  become  acquainted  with 
the  stepmotherly  disposition  of  her  mother-in-law, 
and  be  less  easily  provoked  when  subsequently 
more  serious  troubles  arise.1  In  Terence  (Hecyra, 
ii.  I,  4),  Laches  laments  "that  all  mothers-in-law 
have  ever  hated  their  daughters-in-law  "  (uno  animo 
omnes  socrus  oderunt  mints).'-  Juvenal,  in  his 
satire  against  women  (vi.  231),  says,  in  a  rather 
coarse  way,  that  matrimonial  peace  is  inconceiva- 
ble so  long  as  the  mother-in-law  lives  (desperanda 
salva  concordia  socru).  Old  German  popular  say- 
ings faithfully  reproduce  the  ancient  maxims : 
"  /'"/  Swiger  ne  iceiss,  dass  sie  Snur  gewesan  "  (the 
mother-in-law  has  forgotten  that  she  was  ever  a 
daughter-in-law)  ;3  "  Die  beste  Swigar  ist  die,  auf 
deren  Rock  die  Ijanse  weiden"  (the  best  mother-in- 
law  is  one  on  whose  gown  the  geese  feed,  ;'.  e.  who 
is  dead). 

The  family  life  of  Naomi  with  her  daughters  in- 
law affords  no  trace  whatever  of  such  sad  experi- 
ences. They  mutually  love  each  other  —  both 
during  the  lives  of  the"  husbands  and  after  their 
ii  cease,  —  although  they  belong  to  different  tribes. 
The  praise   fur   this  naturally   belongs   largely  to 

1  Cf.  Jerome,  adv.  Jovinian.  lib.  i.  48,  p.  317,  and  Com- 
■<.»■  <<<t  Mutiaam,  on  ch.  vii.  p.  519  i,ed.  Migne.  vi.  p. 
1221). 

-  l'liny,  in  his  Panegyr.  Trajani,  cap.  84.  Bays;  "quo 
luideui    admirabilius   existimandum  est,   quod   mulieribus 


the  mother,  whose  kind  and  genial  soul  evidently 
answered  to  her  beautiful  name.  Thus  much  may 
also  be  gathered  from  her  further  conversation 
with  her  daughters.  But  the  unhappy  relations 
between  daughter  and  mother-in-law,  elsewhere 
usual,  must  in  general  have  been  unknown  in 
Israel.  Otherwise  the  prophet  could  not  represent 
it  as  a  sign  of  the  extremest  social  ruin  that, 
as  the  son  against  the  father,  and  the  daughter 
against  the  mother,  so  the  daughter-in-law  rises 
up  against  the  mother-in-law  (Mic.  vii.  6)  ;  a  pas- 
sage to  which  Christ  alludes  when  he  speaks  of  the 
effects  to  be  brought  about  in  social  lite  by  his 
gospel  (Matt.  x.  35). 

Vers.  9,  10.  Jehovah  grant  you  that  you 
may  find  a  safe  place.  If  he  be  truly  worthy  of 
love  who  amid  his  own  sorrow  still  thinks  of  the 
welfare  of  others,  then,  surely,  Naomi  is  worthy 
of  love.  She  has  been  called  upon  to  part  with  ail 
that  was  dear  to  her,  with  hustand  and  children. 
She  stands  quite  alone  in  her  advanced  age.  But 
even  yet  all  partings  are  not  over.  She  thinks 
that  now  also  she  must  no  longer  allow  herself  to 
be  accompanied  by  Orpah  and  Ruth.  Both  the 
daughters-in-law  are  yet  young ;  should  she  take 
them  with  her  into  her  uncertain  lot !  She  has  not 
the  presumption  to  forget  their  future  in  thoughts 
about  her  own ;  nor  the  vanity  to  think  that  the 
widows  of  her  sons  should  not  marry  again.  The 
position  of  a  single  woman  in  antiquity  was  an 
unhappy  one.  It  was  altogether  customary  for 
youthful  widows  to  marry  again.  Only  a  hus- 
band's house  is  the  true  asylum  for  a  woman. 
There  she  finds  protection,  safety,  and  honor.  That 
is  the  idea  of  the  menuchah,  the  rest,  which  Naomi 
wishes  that  Jehovah  may  give  each  of  them  in  the 
house  of  another  husband.  It  is  impossible  to 
imagine  a  more  beautiful  expression  of  the  end  of 
marriage  to  a  woman.  The  possession  of  a  menu- 
chah, an  asylum  of  honor  and  freedom,  is  the  high- 
est happiness  ;  the  want  of  it,  a  terrible  misfor- 
tune. Among  other  evils,  Israel  is  told  that  in 
the  event  of  disobedience  it  shall  have  no  menucfud 
(Dent  xxviii.  65).4  The  holy  land,  if  it  be  pos- 
sessed in  faith,  is,  as  it  were,  the  earthly  house  tt 
which  Israel  has  come,  like  a  wife  to  the  house  of 
her  husband.  "  Hitherto,"  says  Moses,  Deut.  xii. 
9,  "  you  have  not  yet  come  unto  the  menuchah 
which  Jehovah  your  God  gives  you."  The  desert 
had  no  place  of  rest,  properly  speaking  :  it  was 
only  the  way,  not  the  goal.  Solomon  was  the 
first  who  could  praise  God  for  the  complete  gift  of 
menuchah  to  his  people  (1  Kgs.  viii.56).  It  is  true. 
Israel's  highest  menuchah  is  God,  Jehovah  himself 
and  his  redemption.  He  is  the  true  goal  of  life. 
Says  the  prophet  (Isa.  xi.  10)  :  "  And  it  shall  come 
to  pass  in  that  day  :  the  Root  of  Jesse  —  to  him 
shall  the  nations  repair,  and  his  menuchah  is  glory." 
And.  hence,  Christ  also  says,  Matth.  xi.  29  :  "  Learn 
of  me,  that  I  am  meek  and  lowly  in  heart,  and  you 
shall  find  rest  (avairavffiv,  menuchah)  for  your 
souls." 

Such  a  inenvchah  Orpah  and  Ruth  had  enjoyed 
in  the  homes  of  their  husbands ;  and  they  are,  as  it 
were,  vocationlcss,  if  they  find  not  another.  It 
was  in  the  natural  course  of  ancient  social  life  that 
they  should  marry  again  among  the  people  to 
whom  they  belonged.  Naomi  thinks  it  wrong  for 
duabus  in  una  domo,  parique  fortuna,  nullum  certamen 
nulla  contentio  est." 

3  Similar  ideas  are  treated  of  in  his  peculiar  way,  by 
Abraham  a  Sancta  Clara,  in  Juiias,  dtr  Erzschelm,  v.  p.  15 

4  [The  word  in  the  passage  referred  to  is  manoach,  which, 
however,  differs  only  in  form,  cf.  cu.  iii   1.  — Tb.] 


CHAPTER    I.    7-18. 


19 


her  (o  take  them  away  from  that  people.  Turn 
hack,  she  says  :  may  the  blessing  of  the  God  of 
Israel  be  with  you  even  in  the  midst  of  Moab  !  May 
lie  grant  you  vest  in  the  house  of  a  new  husband  ! 
And  she  kisses  them,  as  the  signal  of  parting  (cf. 
ver.  14).  —  but  a  loud  weeping  arises.  Naomi  finds 
it  hard  to  be  obliged  to  leave  these  last  dear  friends 
whom  she  has  become  accustomed  to  regard  as 
daughters.  Orpab  and  Ruth  are  unwilling  to  turn 
hack,  unwilling  to  let  the  loved  Naomi  proceed 
alone  on  her  solitary  way  through  life.  "  We  go 
with  thee,"  they  say,  "  to  thy  people." 

Vers.  11—13.  And  Naomi  said :  Have  I  then 
yet  sons  in  my  womb  ?  It  is  by  means  of  two 
considerations  that  Naomi  seeks  to  persuade  her 
daughters-in-law  to  return  :  first,  she  holds  out  to 
them  the  prospect  of  new  family  connections  in 
Moab ;  and,  secondly,  she  shows  them  that  all 
hope  of  renewed  married  happiness  is  ended  if  they 
go  with  her.  The  surprising  delicacy  with  which 
this  is  done,  is  such  as  to  show  clearly  how  truly 
a  religious  love  educates  and  refines.  The  ulti- 
mate cause  of  the  grief  occasioned  by  the  necessity 
of  impending  separation,  lies  after  all  solely  in  the 
fact  that  Ruth  and  Orpah  are  Moabitesses.  Na- 
omi could  not  bear  to  tell  them  that  if  they,  as 
daughters  of  Moab,  went  with  her  to  Israel,  they 
would  rind  themselves  in  a  less  hospitable  situation 
than  they  had  hitherto  enjoyed.  She  is  too  tender 
to  remind  these  good  children  of  the  fact  that  Is- 
rael does  not  sanction  connections  with  Moab. 
On  this  account,  she  had  already  suggested  (ver.  8), 
with  special  emphasis,  that  they  should  return  to 
Moab,  each  to  her  mother's  house,  thus  putting  the 
natural  Moabitish  mother  over  against  herself,  the 
Israelitish  mother-in-law.  She  would  thereby  in- 
timate to  them,  as  delicately  and  indirectly  as  possi- 
ble, that  they  could  hope  for  nothing  in  Israel 
except  what  she  herself  could  give ;  that  they 
could  enter  into  her  house,  indeed,  but  not  into 
Israel's  national  life.  Naomi's  speech  in  vers.  12, 
13,  is  a  climactic  utterance  of  grief,1  which  often 
says  so  many  really  unnecessary  things,  in  order 
to  conceal  others  which  it  dares  not  say.  Orpah 
and  Ruth  are  themselves  aware  of  all  that  Naomi 
says  to  them  in  these  verses.  In  wishing  to  go 
with  her,  they  cannot  possibly  have  a  thought  of 
building  hopes  on  sons  yet  to  be  born  to  Naomi  by 
another  marriage.  But  —  and  this  is  what  Naomi 
would  make  them  feel  —  any  other  hope  than  this 
vain  one,  they  as  Moabitish  women  could  not  have 
in  Israel.  If  I  myself — sir.'  gives  them  to  under- 
stand—  could  yet  have  sons,  I  would  take  you 
with  me.  My  home  would  then  be  your  home  too. 
Tome  you  are  dear  as  daughters-in-law,  whether  in 

i  The  climax  of  grief  shows  itself  in  the  climax  of  im- 
possibilities adduced  to  show  that  she  can  have  no  other 
eons  for  Ruth  and  Orpah.  In  the  first  place  she  says,  I  am 
too  old  ;  but  if  I  were  not,  I  have  no  husband.  But  even 
if  I  had  a  husband,  and  brought  forth  children  this  very 
night,  two  of  them,  and  they  sous,  would  you  wait  till  they 
were  grown  up.  aDd  shut  yourselves  iu  until  they  were  mar- 
riageable :  The  word  ^23?,  here  used  iu  the  sense  of  shut- 
ling  one's  self  in.  does  not  occur  again  in  Scripture,  and  re- 
teives  its  explanation  only  from  its  use  in  this  sense  in 
the  later    Hebrew.     This  meaning,     however,   is   evidently 

very  ancient.  It  is  connected  with  *?,  garden,  the  irapa- 
3ciaos,  which  was  closed  in,  hedged  in.  Ruth  and  Orpah 
would  have  had  to  look  upon  themselves  as  brides  of  the 
supposed  s>ns  of  Naomi   and  must  therefore  have  been  shut 

in.  With  this  the  explanation  of  the  word  H-""2  itself 
stands  connected.  Kallali  means  bride  and  daughter-n-law 
as    newly-married  wife),  in    the   same  way  as  the    3reek 


Israel  or  in  Moab.  but  other  prospect  have  you 
none.  Here  where  everything  turns  on  love.  th6 
fulhller  of  every  law.  Naomi  does  not  think  of  the 
legal  provisions  with  respect  to  levirate  marriages; 
but  she  heaps  up  the  improbabilities  against  her 
being  able  to  furnish  husbands  to  her  daughters- 
in-law  in  Israel,  in  order  in  this  veiled  manner  to 
indicate  that  this  was  nevertheless  the  only  possi- 
ble ground  of  hope  for  them  in  Israel. 

For  I  am  worse  off  than  you  are.  It  is  very 
painful  for  Naomi  to  let  them  go,  for  she  is  entirely 
alone.  But  she  cannot  answer  it  to  take  them 
with  her,  seeing  she  can  offer  them  no  new  home. 
Undoubtedly,  she  is  in  a  worse  situation  than  that 
of  the  young  women.  For  them  there  is  yet  a 
possible  future  among  their  people.  Naomi  has 
buried  her  happiness  in  a  distant  grave,  For  her 
there  is  no  future.  The  last  of  those  dear  to  her, 
she  herself  must  tear  away  from  her  heart.  "Je- 
hovah's hand,"  she  says,  "  went  forth  against  me." 
She  is  soon  to  experience  that  his  mercy  is  not  yet 
exhausted. 

Ver.  14.  But  Euth  clave  unto  her.  Orpah 
suffers  herself  to  be  persuaded,  and  goes ;  but 
Ruth  remains,  and  will  not  leave  her.  The  result 
of  Naomi's  tears  is,  that  Orpah  takes  leave  of  her, 
and  that  Ruth  clings  to  her  only  the  more  closely. 
The  hopelessness  of  the  future,  on  which  the  mother 
had  dilated,  leads  Orpah  back  to  Moab,  but  suffers 
Kuth  to  go  with  her  to  Israel.  All  that  Naomi 
had  said,  her  solitariness,  poverty,  sorrow,  only 
served  to  attach  her  more  firmly.  Orpah  too  was 
attached  and  well  disposed  ;  but  still,  with  eyes  of 
love,  although  she  had  them,  she  yet  saw  herself, 
while  Ruth  saw  only  the  beloved  one.  It  might 
be  said  with  a  certain  degree  of  truth,  that  the  same 
cause  induced  Orpah  to  go  and  Ruth  to  remain, 
the  fact,  namely,  that  Naomi  had  no  longer  either 
son  or  husband.  The  one  wished  to  become  a 
wife  again,  the  other  to  remain  a  daughter.  Few 
among  the  natural  children  of  men  are  as  kind 
and  good  as  Orpah;  but  a  love  like  that  of  Ruth 
has  scarcely  entered  the  thoughts  of  poets.  An- 
tigone dies  for  love  of  her  brother ;  but  the  life 
which  awaited  Ruth  was  more  painful  than  death. 
Alcestis  sacrifices  herself  for  her  husband,  and 
Sigune  (in  the  Parcwal  of  Wolfram  v  Eschcn- 
liach)  persistently  continues  in  a  solitary  cell,  with 
the  corpse  of  her  lover  whom  she  had  driven  into 
battle,  until  she  dies  ;  but  Ruth  goes  to  a  foreign 
land  and  chooses  poverty,  not  for  a  husband  or  a 
lover,  but  for  the  mother  of  him  who  long  since 
was  torn  away  from  her-  She  refuses  to  leave  her 
for  the  very  reason  that  she  is  poor,  old,  and  child- 
less.    Naomi,  having  lost  her  sons,  shall  not  on 

i'vix<ttn  (cf.  Matt  x.  35.  as  also  the  rendering  of  the  LXX. 
and  the  German  Brnut,  Grimm.  IVorterb.  ii.  332).  The 
Greek  i-vfitj>7j  explains  itself  from  the  Latin  nvbere.  to  cover, 
to  veil.  The  bride  already  covered  herself,  like  the  wife, 
withdrew  herself  from  the  eyes  of  men,  and  was  shut  up. 
The  goddesses  themselves  were  originally  called  taVoJai 
probably  because  they  were  conceived  of  as  rendered  invisi- 
ble by  the  nature-covering  of  tree  and  fountain.  The  use 
of  ovSi'»a»ja<|>os,  for  sister-in-law,  by  the  LXX.  in  ver.  15.  is 
peculiar,  and  doubtless  inteuded  to  mean  "  the  other,  second 
the  sister-daughter-in-law.1'  rather  than  "sister-in-law* 
In  classic  authors  it  does  not  occur  ;  for  iu  o-vi-pv^oko^os 
the  trvv  refers  to  KOfios.  The  Hebrew  bride  derives  hel 
name  from  the  garland  with  which  it  was  customary  tc 
crown  both  bride  and  bridegroom  (cf.  Mader,  de  Corona.* 
Helmet.  1662.  p.  35,  etc.).  The  symbolism  of  the  word  con- 
tains  profound  poetical  ideas.  It  represents  a  shutting  in 
It  is  true  ;  but  by  flowers,  — a  shutting  up  unto  perfactioi 
and  coronation. 


20 


THE  BOOK  OF   RUTH 


thai  account  lose  her  daughters  also.  Rather  than 
leave  her  to  suffer  alone,  Ruth  will  starve  with,  or 
beg  for  her.  Here  is  love  for  the  dead  and  the 
livlug,  surpassing  that  of  Alcestis  and  Sigune. 
That  Ruth  does  for  her  mother-in-law,  what  as  the 
highest  filial  love  the  poet  invents  for  Antigone, 
when  he  represents  her  as  not  leaving  her  blind 
father,  is  in  actual  life  almost  unexampled.  Nor 
would  it  be  easy  to  find  an  instance  of  a  deeper 
conflict  than  that  which  love  had  to  sustain  on  this 
occasion.  The  foundation  of  it  was  laid  when 
Elimelech  left  his  people  in  order  not  to  share  their 
woes.  It  was  rendered  inevitable,  when,  against 
the  law  of  Israel,  his  sons  took  wives  of  the  daugh- 
ters of  Moab.  It  broke  out  when  the  men  died. 
Their  love  for  their  Israelitish  husbands  had  made 
the  women  strangers  in  their  native  land  ;  and  the 
love  of  Naomi  for  her  Moabitish  daughters  made 
her  doubly  childless  in  Israel.  Nationality,  laws, 
and  custom,  were  about  to  separate  mother-  and 
daughters-in-law.  But  as  love  had  united  them, 
so  also  love  alone  has  power  to  solve  the  conflict, 
but  only  such  a  love  as  Ruth's.  Orpah  escapes 
the  struggle  by  returning  to  Moab ;  Ruth  ends  it 
by  going  with  Naomi. 

Ver.  15.  Thy  sister-in-law  returned  home  to 
her  people  and  to  her  God.  In  these  remarka- 
ble words  lies  the  key  to  the  understanding  of  vers. 
11-13.  Her  daughters  had  said  to  her  (ver.  10), 
"  We  will  go  with  thee  to  thy  people."  It  grieves 
Naomi  to  be  obliged  to  tell  them,  with  all  possible 
tenderness,  that  in  the  sense  in  which  they  mean 
it,  this  is  altogether  impossible.  It  was  necessary 
to  intimate  to  them  that  a  deeper  than  merely_  na- 
tional distinction  compels  their  present  parting : 
that  what  her  sons  had  done  in  Moab,  was  not 
customary  in  Israel;  that  her  personal  love  for 
them  was  indeed  so  great,  that  she  would  gladly 
give  them  other  sons,  if  she  had  them,  but  that  the 
people  of  Israel  was  separated  from  all  other  na- 
tions by  the  God  of  Israel.  Orpah  understood 
this.  Strong  as  her  affection  for  Naomi  was,  her 
natural  desire  for  another  resting-place  in  a  hus- 
band's house  was  yet  stronger ;  and  as  she  could 
not  hope  for  this  in  Israel,  she  took  leave  and  went 
back.  For  the  same  reason,  Naomi  now  speaks 
more  plainly  to  Ruth :  thy  sister-in-law  returned 
home  to  her  people  and  to  her  God.  It  is  not  that 
we  belong  to  different  nations,  but  that  we  worship 
different  Gods,  that  separates  us  here  at  the  gates 
of  Israel. 

Vers.  16,  17.  And  Ruth  said,  Thy  people  is 
my  people,  and  thy  God  my  God.  Naomi's 
house,  her  character  and  life,  have  won  for  her  the 
love  of  her  daughters-in-law.  Ruth  cleaves  to  her 
and  will  not  leave  her,  although  poverty  and 
misery  await  her.  For  love  to  her  she  proposes 
to  give  up  not  only  home  and  family,  but  also 
all  the  heart-joys  that  might  there  yet  be  hers. 
She  cleaves  to  her  thus,  although  she  is  of  Israel. 
Naomi  and  her  house  have  made  Israel  also  appear 
lovely  in  the  eyes  of  Ruth.  Who  would  not  wish 
to  go  to  a  people  whose  sole  known  representatives 
were  so  amiable  as  Naomi  and  her  family !  In 
Moab,  the  young  women  had  not  been  made  aware 
that  one  cannot  be  united  to  Israel  without  ac- 
knowledging Israel's  God,  for  they  had  entered  the 
marriage  relation  with  sons  of  Israel  without  en- 
tering into  covenant  with  their  God.  Now,  how- 
rver,  they  learn,  from  Naomi's  intimations,  that 
that  which  Mahlon  and  Chilion  had  done,  was 
against  the  custom  of  Israel.  The  discovery  in- 
Itantly  manifests  itself  in  different  effects  on  Orpah 
»nd  Ruth.     Orpah  is  repelled,  because  she  thinks 


only  of  the  bridal  she  might  lose.  Ruth  is  attracted 
for  if  that  which  distinguishes  this  people  which 
she  already  loves  be  its  God,  then  she  loves  that 
God  also.  In  Naomi  she  loves  both  people  and 
God.  Ruth's  love  is  true  love  :  it  cleaves  to  Na- 
omi not  for  advantages,  but  on  account  of  her  vir- 
tues and  amiability.  Ruth  desires  to  be  one  with 
her  for  life.  She  will  not  let  her  be  alone,  wher 
ever  she  may  be.  What  Naomi  has,  she  also  will 
have,  her  people  and  her  God.  And  this  she  ex- 
presses at  once,  so  clearly  and  decidedly,  that  in 
ver.  17  she  swears  by  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel. 
The  Jewish  expositors,  after  the  example  of  the 
Targum,  suppose  a  dialogue  to  have  taken  place 
in  which  Naomi  has  first  explained  to  Ruth  the 
difficulties  connected  with  faith  in  the  God  of  Is- 
rael. All  this,  however,  should  be  considered 
merely  as  a  didactic  anticipation  of  her  subsequent 
experiences.  In  our  narrative,  the  confession  of 
Ruth,  "  thy  God  is  my  God,"  is  the  highest  stage 
of  that  devotion  which  she  yields  to  Naomi  for 
life.  She  has  vowed  that  nothing  shall  separate 
her  love  from  its  object ;  for  whatever  could  sep- 
arate it,  would  make  it  imperfect.  But  since  the 
God  of  Israel  is  the  true  ground  of  all  the  love 
which  she  felt  for  her  Israelitish  friends,  it  follows 
that  her  confession  of  Him  is  the  keystone  of  her 
vow.  It  is  at  the  same  time  the  true  solution  of 
the  conflict  into  which  persons  who  mutually  loved 
each  other  had  fallen.  It  rectifies  the  error  com- 
mitted by  her  husband  when  he  took  the  Moabi- 
tish woman  notwithstanding  her  relation  to  the  idol 
of  Moab.  The  unity  of  the  spirit  has  been  attained, 
which  not  only  shows  true  love,  but  even  in  mem- 
ory reconciles  what  was  amiss  in  the  past.  For 
Naomi's  grief  was  so  great,  not  only  because  she 
had  lost  her  sons,  but  also  because  the  daughters- 
in-law  which  she  had  must  be  given  up,  and  she  be 
left  alone.  And  as  love  enforced  the  separation, 
so  love  also  became  the  cord  drawing  to  a  yet 
closer  union.  If  Naomi  believed  herself  fallen  out 
of  the  favor  of  God  on  Moab's  account,  she  could 
derive  comfort  from  Ruth  who  for  her  sake  entered 
into  the  people  of  God. 

Ver.  18.  And  when  she  saw  that  she  was 
firmly  resolved.  Older  expositors  have  imagined 
that  Naomi's  efforts  to  persuade  her  daughters-in- 
law  to  return  homeward,  were  not  altogether  se- 
riously meant.  She  only  wished  to  test  them. 
They  "take  this  view  in  order  to  free  Naomi  from 
the  reproach  of  being  too  little  anxious  to  intro- 
duce her  daughters  into  Israel  and  the  true  faith 
(Rambach:  Quarunt  hie  biterpreies  an  recte  fecerit 
Noomia,  etc.).1  But  this  whole  exposition  is  a 
dogmatic  anachronism.  Naomi  could  entertain  no 
thoughts  of  missionary  work  as  understood  in  mod- 
ern times,  and  for  that  she  is  not  to  be  reproached. 
The  great  love  on  which  the  blessing  of  the  whole 
narrative  rests,  shows  itself  precisely  in  this,  that 
Naomi  and  her  daughters-in-law  were  persons  of 
different  nationality  and  religion.  This  contrast  — 
which  a  marriage  of  ten  years  has  only  affection- 
ately covered  up  — it  is,  that  also  engenders  the 
conflict  of  separation.  During  more  then  ten  years 
the  marriage  of  Naomi's  sons  to  Moabitesses  was 
and  continued  to  be  wrong  in  principle,  although, 
in  the  happy  issue  of  their  choice,  its  unlawfulness 
was  lost  sight  of.  What  she  had  not  done  then  in 
the  spring-tide  of  their  happiness,  Naomi  could  not 
think  of  doing  now.  Her  generous  love  shows  it- 
self now  rather  in  dissuading  her  daughters-in-law 
1  «  Sed  alii  tamen  Uebraei  pariter  ac  Christian!  interpre- 
tes  Noomiam  a  reatu  liberant,  et  non  serin  Bed  tentand. 
ammo  Id  egisse  statuunt."  -  Rambach,  p.  743. 


CHAPTER  I.   7-18. 


21 


fron.  going  with  her  to  Israel.  For  they  surely 
would  nave  gone  along,  if  their  deceased  husbands, 
instead  of  remaining  in  Moab,  had  returned  to  Is- 
rael. But  their  death  had  in  reality  dissolved  every 
external  bond  with  Naomi.  No  doubt,  Naomi 
now  feels  the  grief  which  the  unlawful  actions  of 
her  husband  and  sons  have  entailed.  Had  her 
daughters-in-law  been  of  Israel,  there  would  nat- 
urally be  no  necessity  of  her  returning  solitary  and 
forsaken.  She  feels  that  "  the  hand  of  Jehovah  is 
against  her."  How  indelicate  would  it  be  now, 
nay  how  unbecoming  the  sacredness  of  the  rela- 
tions involved,  if  Naomi,  at  this  moment,  when 
she  is  herself  poor,  and  with  no  prospect  in  the 
future,  were  to  propose  to  her  daughters-in-law  to 
leave  not  merely  the  land  but  also  the  god  of 
Moab,  that  thus  they  might  accompany  her.  If 
she  had  ever  wished,  at  this  moment  she  would 
scarcely  dare,  to  do  it.  It  is  one  of  the  symptoms 
of  the  conflict,  that  she  could  not  do  it.  The  ap- 
pearance of  self  interest  would  have  east  a  blot  on 
the  purity  of  their  mutual  love.  Naomi  might  now 
feel  or  believe  what  she  had  never  before  thought 
of,  —  she  could  do  nothing  but  dissuade.  Anything 
else  would  have  rudely  destroyed  the  grace  and 
elevation  of  the  whole  beautiful  scene.  The  great 
difference  between  Orpah  and  Ruth  shows  itself 
in  the  very  fact  that  the  one  yields  to  the  dissuasion, 
the  other  withstands.  Ruth  had  the  tenderly  sen- 
sitive heart  to  understand  that  Naomi  must  dis- 
suade ;  and  to  all  Naomi's  unuttered  reasons  for 
feeling  obliged  to  dissuade,  she  answers  with  her 
vow.  Naomi  dissuades  on  the  ground  that  she  is 
poor,  —  "  where  thou  abidest,  I  will  abide,"  is  the 
answer  ;  that  she  is  about  to  live  among  another 
people,  —  "  thy  people  is  my  people  ;  "  that  she 
worships  another  God,  —  "  thy  God  is  my  God  ;  " 
that  she  has  no  husband  for  her,  —  "  only  death 
shall  part  me  from  thee."  Under  no  other  circum- 
stances could  the  conflict  have  found  an  end  so 
beautiful.  Naomi  must  dissuade  in  order  that 
Ruth  might  freely,  under  no  pressure  hut  that  of 
her  own  love,  accept  Israel  s  God  and  people. 
Only  after  this  is  done,  and  she  holds  firmly  to  her 
decision,  does  Naomi  consent  and  "  cease  to  dis- 
suade her." 

Note  to  verse  8:  "Jehovah  deal  kindly  with 
you,  as  ye  have  dealt  with  the  dead  and  with  me." 
The  love  which  unites  husband  and  wife  in  mar- 
riage, reconciles  the  contrasts  inherent  in  difference 
of  nationality,  makes  peace,  gives  a  good  con- 
science, and  leaves  a  blessed  memory.  Christian 
families,  too,  will  do  well  to  look  upon  the  good 
understanding  existing  between  Naomi  and  her 
daughters-in-law  as  an  example  to  be  followed.  It 
originated  in  the  right  love  of  the  wives  for  their 
husbands,  and  of  the  mother  for  her  sons.  A  right 
love  rejoices  in  the  happiness  of  its  objects,  even 
though  derived  through  others.  The  jealousy  of 
mothers  toward  their  children-in-law,  and  of  wives 
toward  their  husbands'  parents  does  not  spring 
from  love. 

A  pleasing  instance  of  right  relations  with  a 
nother-in-law  comes  to  light  in  the  gospel  history. 
Jesus  enters  into  the  house  of  Peter,  whose  mother- 
in-law  liss  sick  of  a  fever.  Request  is  immediately 
made  ir  her  behalf,  and  He,  always  full  of  love 
ready  tc  *ow  forth  in  miracles  wherever  He  sees 
love,  heais  her  (Matth.  viii.  14  ff.  and  paral.).  The 
term  wtvSepd,  used  in  this  account  by  the  gospels, 
is  also  employed  by  the  Sept.  with  reference  to 
Naomi. 

Origen  has  a  remarkable  passage,  thoroughly 
worthy  of  his  noble  spirit  (cf.  on  Job,  Lib.  i.) : 


Blessed  is  Ruth  who  so  clave  to  her  aged  mother 
in-law  that  she  would  not  leave  her  until  death 
For  this  reason,  Scripture  indeed  has  justly  ex 
tolled  her;  but  God  has  beatified  her  forever. 
But  He  will  judge,  and  in  the  resurrection  con- 
demn, all  those  wicked  and  ungodly  daughters-in- 
law  who  deal  out  abuse  and  wrong  to  their  parents- 
in-law,  unmindful  of  the  fact  that  they  gave  life 

and  sustenance  to  their  husbands If, 

therefore,  thou  lovest  thy  husband,  0  wife,  then 
love  them  also  who  gave  him  being,  and  thus 
brought  up  a  son  for  themselves  and  a  husband  for 
thee.  Seek  not  to  divide  the  son  from  his  father 
or  mother  !  Seek  not  to  bring  the  son  to  despise 
or  father  or  mother,  lest  thou  fall  into  the  con- 
demnation of  the  Lord  in  the  day  of  awful  inquest 
and  judgment." 

But  these  excellent  words  never  found  the  right 
echo.  Even  Jerome  says  :  prope  modum  natwale  est, 
at  minis  socntm  et  socrus  oderit  nurtim.  And  yet  it 
never  was  the  case  where  Christian  virtue  was 
actually  alive. 

Monica,  the  mother  of  Augustine,  had  to  endure 
not  a  little  from  her  mother-in-law.  The  lat- 
ter supported  Monica's  disobedient  maid-servants 
against  their  mistress.  She  allowed  them  to  bring 
her  all  sorts  of  evil  reports  about  her.  Her  daugh- 
ter-in-law she  daily  chided  and  provoked.  But 
Monica  met  her  with  such  complaisant  love,  quiet 
obedience,  and  amiable  patience,  as  to  conquer  the 
irritable  mother-in-law,  so  that  she  became,  and 
continued  to  be  to  the  last,  the  friend  and  protect- 
ress of  her  daughter-in-law.  No  wonder  that  from 
such  a  heart  there  sprang  the  faith  and  spirit  of  a 
man  like  Augustine  (cf.  Barthel,  Monica,  p.  31). 

Not  only  the  history,  but  also  the  traditions  and 
the  poetry,  of  the  ftliddle  Ages,  frequently  depict 
the  sufferings  of  daughters-in-law,  inflicted  on  them 
by  the  mothers  of  their  husbands.  As  part  of  the 
"  swan  -legends  "  of  the  lower  Rhine,  we  have  the 
peculiar  story  of  Matabruna,  the  bad  wife  of  the 
king  of  Lillefbrt,  who  persecuted  and  tormented 
her  pious  and  believing  daughter-in-law  Beatrix, 
until  at  last  the  latter,  by  God's  help,  came  off  vic- 
torious (cf.  Wolf,  Niederldndische  Sagen,  p.  175; 
also  my  treatise  on  the  Schwan,  p.  24). 

Hermann  Boerhaave's  step-mother  having  died, 
the  universally  celebrated  physician  wrote  as  fol- 
lows :  "  All  the  skill  with  which  God  has  endowed 
me  I  applied,  and  spent  whole  half-nights  in  con- 
sidering her  disease,  in  order  to  prolong  her  life,  — 

but  all  in  vain But  I  weep  too,  as 

often  as  the  thought  occurs  to  me  that  now  I  shall 
have  no  more  opportunity  to  show  her  my  love, 
veneration,  and  gratitude ;  and  I  should  be  alto- 
gether inconsolable,  if,  since  my  coming  of  age,  I 
had  been  even  once  guilty  of  disrespect  or  ingrat- 
itude toward  her." 

It  may  hence  be  seen  how  deeply-grounded  in  the 
nature  of  things  it  is,  that  in  German  [and  if  in 
German,  then  in  English  too.  —  Tr.]  glauben  [to 
believe]  and  lieben  [to  love]  are  really  of  the  sam 
root.  In  Gothic,  Hubs  means,  "  dear,  beloved  "  ;  hu 
ban,  "  to  be  beloved."  With  this,  the  likewise  Gothic 
laubjan,  galaubjan, "  to  believe,"  is  connected.  In  the 
version  of  Ultilas,  even  i\Hs,  hope,  is  at  Rom.  xv 
13  translated  by  lubains.  And  in  truth :  Faith,  Love 
Hope,  tl»ese  three  are  one  ;  but  the  greatest  of  them 
is  Love. 

H0MILET1CAL   AND   PRACTICAL. 

"Jehovah  deal  kindly  with  you,  as  ye  have  deal, 
with   the   dead  and   with  me.  '     Naomi's  husband 


9<l 


THE    BOOK   OF   RUTH 


was  dead.  Her  eons  had  married  Moabitesses,  and 
bad  died  childless.  Usually,  and  sometimes  even 
in  "  believing"  families,  mothers-in-law  and  daugh- 
ters-in-law are  not  on  the  best  of  terms.  But 
Naomi,  although  in  Moab,  enjoyed  sueh  love  in  the 
house  of  her  sons,  that  her  daughters-in-law  did 
not  leave  her,  but  went  with  her,  and  that  Ruth, 
for  her  sake,  left  native  land,  parents,  and  property. 
She  won  love  because  she  was  Naomi,  "  pleasant." 
She  cherished  no  vanity,  sought  no  strife,  and 
did  not  wish  to  rule ;  hence  she  had  peace  and 
love. 

Starke  :  "  Piety,  wherever  found,  has  the  power 
to  win  the  hearts  of  people.  It  is  able  to  diffuse 
ioy  even  among  those  who  do  not  believe." 

Naomi  was  pleasant  and  pious.  She  illustrated 
the  saying  of  the  apostle  Peter  ( 1  Epis.  iii.  1 )  : 
"  that,  if  any  obey  not  the  word,  they  may  also 
without  the  word  be  won  by  the  conversation  of 
the  wives."  By  her  conduct  she  preached  the  God 
of  Israel,  "  in  a  meek  and  quiet  spirit,"  in  the 
midst  of  Moab  ;  and  hence  the  love  which  she  won 
redounded  to  the  praise  of  Israel,  and  became  a 
silent  preaching  of  the  truth  to  unbelievers. 

Starke  :  "As  long  as  the  Church  is  called  Na- 
omi, there  is  no  lack  of  adherents ;  but  when  she 
appears  as  Mara,  and  is  signed  with  the  cross  of 
Christ,  many  go  back." 

"  And  Ruth  said,  Thy  people  is  my  people,  and 
thy  God  my  God."  Ruth  is  a  prophecy,  than 
which  none  could  be  more  beautiful  and  engaging, 
of  the  entrance  of  the  heathen  world  into  the  king- 
dom of  God.  She  comes  forth  out  of  Moab,  an 
idolatrous  people,  full  of  wantonness  and  sin,  and 
is  herself  so  tender  and  pure.  In  a  land  where 
dissolute  sensuality  formed  one  of  the  elements  of 
idol  worship,  a  woman  appears,  as  wife  and  daugh- 
ter, chaste  as  the  rose  of  spring,  and  unsurpassed 
in  these  relations  by  any  other  character  in  Holy 
Writ.  Without  living  in  Israel,  she  is  first  ele- 
vated, then  won,  by  the  life  of  Israel,  as  displayed 
in  a  foreign  land.  Amid  surrounding  enmity  and 
jealousy  toward  Israel,  she  is  capable  of  being 
formed  and  attracted  through  love. 

It  is  an  undeniable  fact  that  women  have  at  all 
times  entered  more  deeply  than  men  into  the  higher 
moral  spirit  of  the  fellowship  with  God  mediated 
by  Christ.  Women,  especially,  feel  that  marriage 
is  a  divinely  instituted  and  sacred  union.  Their 
hearts  teaeli  them  to  know  the  value  of  the  great, 
treasure  and  consolation  which  faith  in  the  living 
God  gives  to  them  especially.  Ruth's  confession 
of  God  and  his  people  originated  in  the  home  of 
her  married  life.  It  sprang  from  the  love  with 
which  she  was  permitted  to  embrace  Israelites.  It 
was  because  in  these  persons  she  loved  the  con- 
fessors of  Jehovah,  that  her  feelings  had  a  moral 
power  which  never  decays. 

An  ancient  church  teacher  says  :  "  Had  she  not 
been  inspired,  she  had  not  said  what  she  said,  or 
done  what  she  did.  For  what  is  shechiefly  praised? 
For  her  love  to  the  people  of  Israel  or  her  inno- 
cence, for  her  obedience  or  her  faith?  For  her 
love  to  the  people  of  Israel.  For  had  she  desired 
marriage  only  as  a  means  of  pleasure,  she  would 
rather  have  sought  to  obtain  one  of  the  young 
men.  But  as  she  sought  not  sensual  gratification, 
out  the  satisfaction  of  conscience,  she  chose  a  holy 
family  rather  than  youthful  age." 

How  great  a  lesson  is  here  for  the  church  con- 
lidcred  in  its  missionary  character!     The  conduct 


of  one  Israelitish  wciian  in  a  foreign  land,  was 
able  to  call  forth  a  love  and  a  confession  of  God, 
like  that  of  Ruth.  How  imperative,  then,  the  duty 
of  Christians  at  home,  and  how  easy  of  execution, 
to  win  Jews  and  other  unbelievers.  For  love  is 
the  fountain  of  faith.  It  is  written,  Thou  shalt 
love  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart.  The  Jews  must 
learn  to  love  Christ  in  the  Christian,  and  the 
Christian  in  Christ.  Love  removes  all  prejudices, 
divisions,  and  sad  remembrances.  Ruth  loves  a 
woman,  and  is  thereby  led  to  the  God  whom  that. 
woman  confesses.  Must  not  men  love,  if  they 
would  be  loved  ?  Only  love  opens  the  fountain  of 
faith,  but  faith  sanctifies  and  confirms  love. 

Pascal  :  "  The  heart  has  reasons  which  the  rev 
son  does  not  comprehend.  This  is  seen  in  a 
thousand  things.  It  is  the  heart  that  feels  God, 
not  the  reason.  Hence,  that  is  the  more  pe-fec« 
faith  which  feels  God  in  the  heart." 

Ruth  is  not  only  the  type  of  a  convert,  but  alio 
a  teacher  of  those  who  seek  to  convert  others.  For 
she  shows  that  converts  are  made,  not  by  words, 
but  by  the  life,  not  by  disputations,  but  by  love, 
not  by  the  legerdemain  of  a  sentimental  sermon, 
but  by  the  faithful  discharge  of  the  duties  of  life. 
She  teaches  also  by  what  she  gives  up,  —  people, 
home,  parents,  customs,  —  and  all  from  love.  She 
has  had  a  taste  of  an  Israelitish  heart  and  house- 
hold. Whoever  has  tasted  Christ,  can  never  again 
live  without  him,  —  can  never  leave  him  who  loves 
all,  suffered  for  all,  weeps  with  all,  and  redeems  all. 
If  Jews  and  heathen  taste  him,  this  is  effected,  not 
through  external  institutions,  through  dead  works, 
but  through  prayer,  which  tills  the  lives  of  Chris- 
tians with  its  sweetness.  To  the  fanatical,  the 
disputatious,  the  canting,  the  selfish,  the  avaricious, 
—  and  also  to  the  characterless  and  slavish,  —  who 
would  say :  thy  people  is  my  people,  thy  God  is 
my  God  ? 

"  Where  thou  abidest,  I  will  abide ;  where  thou 
diest,  I  will  die.''  Ruth  is  not  only  enrolled  among 
the  feminine  worthies  of  Israel,  with  Sarah,  Re- 
becca, Leah  and  Rachel,  but  heathenism  itself 
throughout  its  vast  extent  cannot  show  a  single 
woman  who  is  her  equal  in  love.  For  hers  is  a 
love  outliving  the  grave,  and  sustained  by  no 
fleshly  relationship,  for  when  her  husband  was 
dead  no  living  person,  mutually  dear,  existed  to 
connect  her  with  Naomi.  Neither  self-interest,  nor 
hope,  nor  vanity,  mix  themselves  up  with  this  love. 
It  is  a  purely  moral  and  spiritual  love,  of  which  no 
other  instance  is  on  record.  It  is  in  fact  the  love 
of  those  whom  God  by  his  mercy  has  won  for  him- 
self, and  who  love  God  in  their  brethren.  It  is  the 
evangelical  love  of  the  Apostles,  who  loved  Greeks 
ami  Franks,  Persians  and  Scythians,  as  their  own 
flesh  and  blood.  Sueh  love  as  this  followed  the 
steps  of  our  Lord,  and  tarried  where  he  was.  Con- 
fession, martyrdom,  prayer,  and  every  brotherly 
thought  or  deed,  spring  from  the  love  of  the  con- 
verted heart.  The  more  heartily  the  soul  cries  out 
to  Christ  himself.  Thy  people  is  my  people,  and 
thy  God  my  God,  the  more  fervently  burns  this 
love, 

Zinzexdorf  :  I  speak  because  I  believe  ;  I  love, 
because  many  sins  are  forgiven  me. 

Sailer  :  Lead  men  through  love  to  love.  For 
love  cultivates  and  preserves  the  true  and  the  good 
by  doctrine,  life,  prayer,  watchfulness,  and  bv  a 
thousand  other  inventions  of  its  inexhausu'-le 
genius. 


CHAPTER   I.    19-22.  23 


Verses  19-22. 
Sorrow  and  Repentance. 

19  So  they  two  went  until  they  came  to  Beth-lehera.  And  it  came  U  pass,  when  they 
were  come  to  Beth-lehem,  that  all  the  city  was  moved  1  about  them  and  they  said.* 

20  Is  this  Naomi  ?  And  she  said  unto  them,  Call  me  not  Naomi,  call  me  Mara  :  for  the 
Almighty  hath  dealt  very  bitterly  with   me  [Lath   inflicted  bitter  sorrow  upon  me]. 

21  I  went  out  full,  and  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  hath  brought  me  home  again  empty:  why 
then  call  ye  me  Naomi,  seeing  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  hath  testified  against  me,  and  the 

22  Almighty  hath  afflicted  me  'i  So  Naomi  returned,  and  Ruth  the  Moabitess  her 
daughter-in-law  with  her.  which  returned  out  of  the  country  [territories]  of  Moab  :  * 
and  they  came  to  Beth-lehem  in  the  beginning  of  barley-harvest. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 
[l  Ver.  19.  _  CHR    Niphal  iruperf.  of  C^H,  cf.  Ges.  67,  Rem.  5  ;  22, 1.  So  Ges.,  Berth.,  Ewald,  eto.   Keil,  Flint, 
ate.,  consider  it  Niph.  imperf.  of   C1H.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  19- —  rT3~^Shn  :  :em.  plural  (cf.  7rP7V,  etc.  in  ver.  20)  Not  exactly,  dicebantque  mulieres,  as  the  Vulg. 
has  it  ;  the  population  of  the  city  are  the  subject'  of  the  verb,  but  in  a  matter  of  this  kind  women  would  naturally  be  80 
prominent  as  to  lead  the  narrator  insensibly  to  use  the  feminine.  Perhaps  Naomi  arrived  at  an  hour  of  the  day  when 
the  labors  of  the  field  left  none  but  women  in  the  city.  —  Tr.J 

[s  Ver.  22  2S"^  ^"W^3  "^^n  :  Dr.  Crrssel  translates  the  whole  clause  thus :  f'  And  so  Naomi  was  returned  home, 

and  Ruth,  the  Moabitess.  her  daughter-in-law,  with  her,  [who  accompanied  her]  after  [or  on.  cf.  the  Com  below]  her  departure 
from  the  fields  of  Moab."  This  rendering,  is,  of  course,  intentionally  free,  and  is  designed  to  indicate  that  what  seems  an 
unnecessary  remark,  really  adds  to  the  sense,  namely,  that  Ruth  was  the  (only)  one  that  clave  to  Naomi,  that  came  with 
her  from  Moab.  But  this  seems  rather  forced.  As  the  same  expression  occurs,  at  ch.  iv.  3,  in  connection  with  Naomi,  it 
may  be  supposed  that  it  became  customary  to  speak  of  Naomi  and  Ruth  as  "  the  returned   from  Moab,"'  or  as  we  should 

Bay,  popularly,  "  the  returned  Moabites.''  In  that  case,  it  would  be  best  (with  Berth.)  to  take  n^t^H  (accented  in  the 
text  as  3d  fern.  perf..  with  the  art.  as  relative,  cf.  Ges.  109,  2d  paragr. ),  as  the  fern,  participle.  The  epithet  would  be  applied 
to  Ruth  by  virtue  of  her  connection  with  Naomi,  cf.  ver.  7.  — Tr  ] 

EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL.  I  brought  to  mind.     Then,  Naomi's  life  and  circum 

.      .  stances  corresponded  with  the  amiable  and  jovous 

Ver.  19.    So  they  two  went.   Naomi  said  noth-  name  she  bore.    Now.  she  were  better  named  Mara, 

ing  more.     She  ceased  to  dissuade.     She  allowed  tae  bitter,  sorrowful  one.     It  is  evident  that  names 

lluth  to  go  with  her.  anil  the   latter  was   as  good  wcre    still    preserved  with  conscious    reference   to 

as    her   words.      She    actually   accompanied   her  their  meaning.    Naomi  manifestly  intends,  by  these 

mother-in-law;  and  so  it  came  to  pass,  that  Naomi  an(j  the  following  words,  to  inform  the  inhabitants 

ditl  not  return  home  alone,  that  is  to  say,  entirely  0f  Bethlehem  of  her  fortunes.     I  am  no  longer  the 

forsaken  and  helpless.  ^  C,U  Naomi;  for  what  of  happiness  I  possessed,  1 

The  whole  city  was  moved  about  them.     Na-  have  lost.     I  have  no  more  anything  that  is  pleas- 

omi's  return  was  an  uncommon  occurrence.     The  ant  aDout  me  :  my  lift,  like  a  salty,  bitter  spring, 

city,  and  especially  the  women,  were  thrown  into  is  without  flavor  or  relish. 

a  peaceable  uproar.  Everybody  ran,  told  the  news,  For  the  Almighty  (Shaddai)  hath  inflicted 
and  wondered.  For  more  than  ten  years  had  passed  bitter  sorrow  upon  me.  Why  Shaddai?  The 
since  she  had  left  Bethlehem.  Then  there  had  „se  of  this  divine  surname  must  here  also  be  con- 
doubtless  been  talk  enough,  as  Naomi  went  away  nected  with  its  pregnant,  proper  signification.  The 
with  her  husband,  in  far  different  and  better  cir-  explanation  which  must  necessarily  be  given  to  it, 
cumstances.  It  may  be  taken  for  granted  that  .  .  .  .  .  -.,,; 
even  then  her  character  had  awakened  sympathy  ls  not  consistent  with  its  denvauon  from  ^Jtv, 
and  affection  in  Bethlehem.  Her  husband,  we  which  always  appears  in  a  bad  sense.  What  this 
know,  belonged  to  a  prominent  family  of  the  citv.  i  explanation  is,  will  become  apparent  when  the  pas^ 


All  this  renders  it  natural  that  the  news  that  Na- 
:;ii  had  returned  to  Bethlehem,  poor  and  sorrow- 
ful, spread  like  wildfire,  and  created  what  to  her 
iras  an  unpleasant  sensation.1  "  Is  that  Naomi !  " 
U  the  universal  exclamation. 

Ver.  20.    Call  me  not  Naomi,  call  me   Mara. 


sages  are  considered  in  which  the  name  is  first, 
and  with  emphasis,  employed.  We  select,  there- 
fore, those  of  Genesis,  hi  which  book  the  name 
Shaddai  occurs  more  frequently  than  in  any  other 
except  Job,  and  always  as  designative  of  the  gra- 
cious, fertile   God,  by  whom  the  propagation  of 


Undoubtedly,  the  general  astonishment  over  such  I  mankind  is  guaranteed.  Thus.it  is  assumed  by 
5  return,  gave  rise  to  many  reflections  which  a  I  God  in  Gten.  xvii.  1  If.  where  he  says  to  Abram, 
woman  especially  would  feel'  deeply.  Not  merely  I  "  I  make  thee  exceedingly  fruitful.  —  to  a  father  of 
the  external  comparison  of  "then"  and  "now,""1  a  multitude  of  nations," etc.  So  likewise.it  occurs 
out  also  the  motives  of  the  former  departure  are   Gen-  xxviii.  3:  "El  Shaddai  will  bless  thee  and 

1   The   Midrash   makes  the  scene   still   more  dramatic  by  ,  occasioned  by  the  fact  that  the  first  wife  of  Boaz   had  tha 
he  explanation,  that  the  concourse  of  the  inhabitants  was  !  very  day  been  carried  to  her  grave  ((  f.  Ruth  Rabba,  31.  dl. 


24 


THE   BOOK   OF  RUTH. 


make  thee  fruitful."  Gen.  xxxv.  11:  "lam  El 
Shaddai,  be  fruitful,  and  multiply."  Gen.  xlviii. 
3:  "El  Shaddai  appeared  unto  me  —  and  said, 
Behold,  I  make  thee  fruitful  and  multiply  thee." 
(jen.  xlix.  25:    "Shaddai  shall  bless  thee  —  with 

blessings  of  the  breasts  (C^Q?)  and  of  the  womb." 
For  the  same  reason  it  is  used  at  Gen.  xliii.  14, 
where  the  fate  of  the  children  of  Jacob  is  in  ques- 
tion. This  gracious  God,  the  source  of  fruitfulness 
and  life,  gives  his  blessing  to  his  chosen  saints,  but 
from  sinners,  and  from  those  whom  He  tries,  He 
takes  away  what  to  others  He  gives.  Hence  the 
frequent  use  of  the  name  in  Job,  who  is  chastened 
in  his  children,  cf.  chap.  viii.  3  :  "  Will  Shaddai  per- 
vert justice  1  If  thy  children  sinned  against  Him, 
He  gave  them  over  into  the  hand  of  their  trans- 
gressions." And  in  this  sense  Naomi  also  uses  the 
name  Shaddai,  in  speaking  of  her  misery.  For 
the  death  of  her  husband  and  her  sons  has  rendered 
her  family  desolate  and  unfruitful.  The  word 
must  therefore  unquestionably  be  referred  to  a  root 

nit!',  still  in  use  in  Arabic,  in  the  sense  "  to  wa- 
ter, to  fertilize."  For  that  all  fertility  comes  from 
water,  by  which  aridity  is  removed  and  thirst  as- 
suaged, is  a  deeply  rooted  conception,  especially  in 
oriental  antiquity.  Numerous  mythical  pictures 
of  heathenism  represent  their  heroes  as  conquering 
drought  and  unfruitfulness  by  liberating  the  rain 
and  the  streams.  The  name  of  the  Indian  god 
Indra  is  derived  from  Ind=und,  to  flow,  and  is 
therefore  equivalent  to  "  the  rain-giver,"  who  frees 
the  clouds  so  that  they  can  dispense  their  showers 
(cf.  E.  Meier,  Ind.  Liederb.,  p.  147  f.).  The  true 
Rain-giver,  the  dispenser  and  increaser  of  fertility, 
uf  the  earth  and  among  beasts  and  men,  is  the 
living,   personal    God,   as    Shaddai.       The  root 

711K7  must  also  explain  "TtP,  mamma,  properly 
the  fountain  of  rain  and  blessings  for  man  and 
beast,  as  Gellius  (xii.  1)  calls  it,  fontem  sanctissimum 
corporis,  and  the  bringer  up  of  the  human  race. 
Hence  we  are  enabled  to  recognize  the  wide-spread 
philological  root  to  which  shadah,  to  water,  shad 
(Aram  tad),  mamma,  belong;  for  it  is  connected 
with  the  Sanskrit  dhe,  Greek  B%aai,  Gothic  dad- 
djnn  (Old  German,  tutta,  etc.,  cf.  Benfey,  Gr.  Gram. 
ii.  -270),  in  all  which  forms  the  idea  of  giving  drink, 
Buckling,  is  present.  From  the  Greek  word,  the 
name  of  the  goddess  Thetis  is  derived,  as  "  Nurse 
of  the  Human  Race  "  (cf.  Welcker,  Gr.  Mylhd.,  i. 
618).  That  Artemis  of  Ephesus  was  represented 
as  a  midtimammia,  is  known  not  only  from  antique 
sculptures,  but  also  from  the  writings  of  the  church 
fathers ;  cf.  the  words  of  Jerome  (in  Procem  Ep. 
Pauli  ad  Ephes. ) :  omnium  bestiarum  et  viventium  esse 
nutricem  mentiuntur.  Naomi  was  rightly  named 
when,  with  a  flourishing  family,  she  went  to 
Moab  —  but  now  Shaddai,  who  gave  the  blessing, 
has  taken  it  away. 

Ver.  21 .  I  went  out  full,  and  Jehovah  hath 
brought  me  home  again  empty.  Full  of  family 
happiness,  of  joy  in  her  sons,  and  of  hope  of  a 
cheerful  old  age  surrounded  by  children  and  chil- 
dren's children  ;  but  empty  now  of  all  these,  with- 
out possessions  and  without  hope.  A  penitent 
feeling   pervades  her  lamentation.      I  went  away 

1  [And,  therefore,  hardly  to  be  called  a  "  reading."  That 
the  LXX.  read  71237,  as  some  have  thought,  is  hardly 
possible,  as  that  word  could  not  be  suitably  construed  with 


notwithstanding  my  fullness,  and  because  I  went 
full,  do  I  return  emptv.  For  this  reason  she  says . 
"  /  went  away,  and  Jehovah  has  brought  me  home 
again."  I  went  because  it  was  my  will  to  go,  not 
God's ;  now,  God's  judgment  has  sent  me  back. 
With  that  one  word  she  gives  vent  to  her  sorrow 
that  in  those  times  of  famine  she  forsook  her  peo- 
ple, although  she  herself  was  happy.  What  an 
evil  thing  it  is  to  follow  one's  own  will,  when  that 
will  is  not  directed  by  the  commandments  of  God ! 
Man  goes,  but  God  brings  home.  But  beside 
this  penitential  feeling,  there  is  another  feature 
indicative  of  Naomi's  beautiful  character,  which 
must  not  be  overlooked.  She  says,  /  went,  me 
hath  liod  afflicted;  not,  We  went  —  my  husband 
took  me  with  him,  —  after  all,  I  only  followed  as  in 
duty  bound.  She  utters  not  a  breath  of  accusation 
against  Elimelech  or  of  excuse  for  herself.  Prop- 
erly speaking,  the  fault  did  lay  with  her  husband 
and  sons.  They  were  the  originators  of  the  under- 
taking that  ended  so  disastrously ;  but  of  this  she 
has  no  memory.  She  neither  accuses,  nor  yet  does 
she  commiserate  and  bewail  them.  Of  the  evils 
which  they  experienced,  she  does  not  speak.  / 
went,  and  me  has  God  brought  home  again,  empty 
and  bereft  of  husband  and  child.  Therefore,  she 
repeats,  call  me  not  Naomi !  That  name,  when 
she  hears  it,  suggests  the  entire  contrast  between 
what  she  was  and  what  she  now  is. 

For    Jehovah    hath     testified    against     me, 

■"D  Tiy$.  The  internal  connection  with  the  pre- 
ceding thoughts  confirms  the  correctness  of  the 
Masoretic  pointing.  The  reading  of  the  LXX., 
"  he  humbled  me,"  was  justly  departed  from,  for  it 
is  only  a  paraphrase  of  the  sense.1  That  which 
Bertheau  considers  to  be  the  difficulty  of  the  pas- 
sage, that  it  makes  God  to  testify  against  a  person, 
while  elsewhere  only  men  bear  testimony,  is  pre- 
cisely the  special  thought  of  Naomi :  "  I  went," 
she  says,  "  and  God  has  testified  that  this  going 
was  a  sin.  Through  the  issue  of  my  emigration 
God  has  testified  that  its  inception  was  not  rooted 
in  Him,  but  in  ourselves."  It  is  a  peculiarity  of 
piety  that  it  ascribes  the  issue  of  all  the  affairs  of 
life  to  God.  "  Was  it  right  or  not,  that  1  (namely, 
Elimelech  and  she)  went  away  to  Moab  !  "  Men 
might  be  in  doubt  about  it.  But  the  end,  she 
says,  bears  witness  against  us,  who  followed  our 
own  inclinations.  God  testified  against  her,  for 
"  Shaddai  hath  afflicted  me."  In  other  words,  in 
that  God,  as  Shaddai,  made  sorrow  my  portion,  He 

testified  against  me.      The  two    clauses,   ■"'J'"'? 

"a  71337,  and  ''VSTl  ^t?,  are  not  so  much 
parallel  as  mutually  explanatory.  In  the  loss  of 
my  children  and  family,  says  Naomi,  I  perceive 
that  He  "  declares  me  guilty,    as  the  Targum  also 

excellently  renders  ^2  71337.  At  the  same  time, 
the  meaning  of  Shaddai  comes  here  again  clearly 
to  view.  For  it  is  He  who  inflicts  sorrow  upon 
her,  only  in  that  her  children  are  taken  from  her 
That  which  God,  as  Shaddai,  the  giver  of  fruitful 
ness,  did  to  her  when  he  caused  her  60ns  to  withet 

away,  proves  that  God  testifies  against  her.  3HU 
is  here  used  just  as  it   is    in  Josh.  xxiv.   20: 

This  general  idea,  he  thinks,  is  then  determined  by  whal 
follows,  so  as  to  mean  :  "  Jehovah  has  worked  against  me." 

On    2   71337.  in  the  sense,  to  testify  against,  of.  Ex.  xx 

T    t' 


I  16;  2  Sam.  i.  16;   Is.  111.  9 ;  ete.     Berthean's  objection 
3.     For  the  same  reason  Bertheau  takes  2  71337  in  the  l  seems  t0  ^  Bumciently  met  above.  —  Te.J 
•ens*    "  t'    bw*ow   labor    on   anything,*'  cf.    Eccles.   i.  13.  | 


CHAPTER  I.   19-22. 


25 


"If  ye  forsake  Jehovah  —  he  will  do  you  hurt 
(23^  y^n)  and  utterly  destroy  you." 

Ver.  22.  So  Naomi  returned  and  Ruth  with 
her.  The  curiosity  of  the  inhabitants  of  Bethle- 
hem is  satisfied ;  they  have  also  heard  the  history 
of  Ruth  ;  but  with  this  their  sympathy  has  like- 
wise come  to  an  end.  Naomi  was  poor  and  God- 
forsaken,—  at  least  according  to  the  pious  and 
penitential  feeling  of  the  good  woman  herself. 
How  natural,  that  in  her  native  place,  too,  she 
should  stand  alone.  But  Ruth  was  with  her.  She 
had  continued  firm  on  the  road,  and  she  remained 
faithful  in  Bethlehem.  Since  there  also  no  one 
assisted  her  mother-in-law,  she  continued  to  be  her 
only  stay  and  the  sole  sharer  of  her  lot.  Her  pres- 
ence is  once  more  expressly  indicated  :  "  and  Ruth, 
the  Moabitess,  with  her,  on  her  departure  from  the 
fields  of  Moab."  No  one  was  with  her  but  Ruth, 
—  who  made  the  journey  from  Moab  with  her,  in 
order  to  take  care  of  her  mother-in-law.  What 
had  become  of  Naomi,  if  Ruth,  like  Orpah,  had 
forsaken  her!  She  had  sunk  into  poverty  and 
humiliation  more  bitter  than  death.  It  is  true,  she 
too,  with  her  husband,  had  left  Israel  in  times  of 
distress.  But  for  this  she  could  not  be  held  respon- 
sible, although  her  generous  spirit  accused  herself 
and  no  one  else.  On  the  other  hand,  she  had  been 
sufficiently  punished,  and  had  confessed  her  guilt. 
But  in  Bethlehem  poor  Naomi  was  made  to  feel 
that  she  now  bore  the  name  of  Mara.  Only  Ruth 
had  respect  to  neither  before  nor  after.  She  re- 
flected on  neither  happy  nor  sorrowful  days.  As 
she  had  loved  in  prosperity,  so  she  remained  true 
in  adversity.  Naomi,  in  her  native  place  and 
among  kindred,  in  Israel,  had  been  alone  and  in 
want,  had  not  the  stranger,  the  widow  of  her  son, 
accompanied  her  from  her  distant  land.  While 
such  love  was  hers,  Naomi  was  not  yet  wholly  mis- 
erable ;  for  God  has  respect  to  such  fidelity. 

And  they  came  to  Bethlehem  in  the  begin- 
ning of  barley-harvest.  Consequently,  in  the 
beginning  of  the  harvest  season  in  general.  This 
statement  is  made  in  order  to  intimate  that  the 
help  of  God  did  not  tarry  long.  The  harvest  itself 
afforded  the  opportunity  to  prepare  consolation 
and  reward  for  both  women  in  their  highest 
need. 

HOMILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

"  Call  me  not  Naomi,  but  Mara."  Naomi  does 
not  conceal  her  condition  when  she  reaches  her 
native  place.  Usually,  the  natural  man,  even  as  a 
beggar,  still  desires  to  shine.  She  has  lost  every- 
thing ;  and  what  she  had  gained,  the  companion- 
ship of  Ruth,  is  not  yet  able  to  console  her.  Her 
very  love  fills  her  with  anxiety  for  this  daughter. 
Recollections  are  very  bitter,  and  the  future  is  full 
of  care.  It  is,  however,  only  because  she  is  empty 
of  all  joys,  that  she  wishes  to  be  called  Mara.  But 
it  was  made  evident  even  in  her  misery  that  what- 
ever she  had  lost,  she  had  found  the  grace  of  God ; 


for  then  too  she  was  not  only  named,  but  truly 
was,  Naomi.  Nor  will  one  who  in  sorrow  does  not 
cease  to  be  lovely,  retain  the  name  of  Mara.  Popt 
Gregory  the  Great,  when  praised  (by  Leander) 
replied  :  "  Call  me  not  Naomi,  i.  e.  beautiful,  but 
call  me  Mara,  since  I  am  full  of  bitter  grief.  For 
I  am  no  more  the  same  person  you  knew  :  out- 
wardly I  have  advanced,  inwardly  I  have  fallen. 
And  I  fear  to  be  among  those  of  whom  it  is  said  : 
Thou  castedst  them  down  when  they  were  lifted 
up.  For  when  one  is  lifted  up,  he  is  cast  down  ; 
he  advances  in  honors  and  falls  in  morals." 

Thomas  a  Kempis  :  "  It  is  good  at  times  to  be 
in  distress ;  for  it  reminds  us  that  we  are  in  exile." 

Bengel  :  "  If  God  have  loved  thee,  thou  canst 
have  had  no  lack  of  trouble." 

"  For  Shaddai  hath  afflicted  me."  Naomi  did  not 
go  to  Moab  of  her  own  accord,  for  she  followed  her 
husband.  Her  stay  also  in  the  strange  land  was 
prolonged  only  because  her  sons  had  married  there. 
After  their  death,  although  poor  and  empty,  she 
returned  home  again,  albeit  she  had  but  little  to 
hope  for.  And  yet  in  the  judgment  she  perceives 
only  her  own  guilt.  Her  loving  heart  takes  all 
God's  judgments  on  itself.  The  more  she  loved,  the 
more  ready  she  was  to  repent.  Being  a  Naomi, 
she  did  not  accuse  those  she  loved.  The  sign  of 
true  love  is  unselfishness,  which  ascribes  ills  to  self, 
blessings  to  others.  As  long  as  she  was  in  misery, 
she  took  the  anger  of  God  upon  herself;  but  as 
soon  as  she  perceived  the  favor  of  God,  she  praised 
Him  as  the  God  who  showed  kindness  to  the  living 
and  the  dead. 

[Fcller:  "And  all  the  city  was  moved,"  etc. 
See  here,  Naomi  was  formerly  a  woman  of  good 
quality  and  fashion,  of  good  rank  and  repute: 
otherwise  her  return  in  poverty  had  not  been  so 
generally  taken  notice  of.  Shrubs  may  be  grubbed 
to  the  ground,  and  none  miss  them ;  but  every  one 
marks  the  felling  of  a  cedar.  Grovelling  cottages 
may  be  evened  to  the  earth,  and  none  observe  them ; 
but  every  traveller  takes  notice  of  the  fall  of  a  stee- 
ple. Let  this  comfort  those  to  whom  God  hath 
given  small  possessions.  Should  He  visit  them  with 
poverty,  and  take  from  them  that  little  they  have, 
yet  their  grief  and  shame  would  be  the  less :  they 
should  not  have  so  many  fingers  pointed  at  them, 
so  many  eyes  staring  on  them,  so  many  words 
spoken  of  them ;  they  might  lurk  in  obscurity :  it 
must  be  a  Naomi,  a  person  of  eminency  and  estate, 
whose  poverty  must  move  a  whole  city.  —  The 
same  :  "  Seeing  the  Lord  hath  testified  against  me, 
and  the  Almighty  hath  afflicted  me."  Who  then 
is  able  to  hold  out  suit  with  God  in  the  court  of 
heaven  1  For  God  himself  is  both  judge  and  wit- 
ness, and  also  the  executor  and  inflicter  of  punish- 
ments. 

Bp.  Hall  :  Ten  years  have  turned  Naomi  into 
Mara.  What  assurance  is  there  of  these  earthly 
things  whereof  one  hour  may  strip  us?  What 
man  can  say  of  the  years  to  come,  thus  will  I  be  ? 
-Tb.1 


26 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


CHAPTER  SECOND. 


Veesb  1. 
The  Relative. 

And  Naomi  had  [in  Bethlehem]  a  kinsman  [lit.  acquaintance,]  of  her  husband's,  a 
mighty  man  of  wealth  [a  valiant  hero],  of  the  family  of  Elimelech  ;  and  his  name 
was  Boaz. 


EXEGETICAL   AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Before  relating  the  wonderful  deliverance  through 
a  kinsman,  by  which  faithfulness  and  love  are  re- 
warded,  the  writer  first  informs  us  briefly  of  the 
existence  of  the  person  who  is  chosen  to  effect  this 
deliverance.  Hitherto  the  acting  persons  have  been 
only  women,  both  of  them  loving  and  excellent; 
now,  the  portrait  of  a  man  is  drawn,  who  is  the 
model  of  an  Israelite,  as  family-head  and  as  land- 
lord, in  war  and  in  peace. 

Naomi    had   a  kinsman.      The  expression  for 

this  is  V^PO.     In  our  texts,  it  is  true,  it  is  pointed 

>1"'!3,  with  ^"TTO'  as  Keri,  in  the  margin.     But 

3^13  occurs  ouly  once  more  (Prov.  vii.  4),  and 

there  also  we   must   probably  read  V^T2.      The 

reading  VT1J3  was  preferred  by  the  Masora  only 

on  account  of  the  fem.  HV'JTO,  which  occurs  at 

eh.  iii.  2.  The  participle  ^^TP  is  of  more  frequent 
occurrence,  cf.  Ps.  lv.  14.  Hitherto.  Naomi  could 
say,  as  does  the   Psalmist  (lxxxviii.  9):    "Thou 

hast  put  my  kinsmen  ('<'iJ.,*?)  far  from  me."  Com- 
pare also  ver.  19  of  the  same  psalm,  where  it  stands 
in  parallelism  with  2HS,  lover,  and  ?3  compan- 
ion. She  has  likewise  experienced  what  is  written 
IV  xxxi.  12,  ef.  Job  xix.  14.  Literally,  to  he  sure, 
the  word  means  only  an  "acquaintance;"  but  it 
expresses  more  than  we  mean  by  that  term.  The 
man  was  not  a  very  near  relative,  but  one  "  known  " 
to  the  family,  as  belonging  to  it.  It  was  an  ac- 
quaintance valid  within  the  family  lines ;  hence  the 
word  signifies  as  much  asjamiliaris.  It  is  used  in 
n  noteworthy  connection  at  2  Kgs.   x.   11,  where 

Jehu  -lays  all  the  great  men,  the  C'V^Jp,  and 
the  priests  of  A  hah,  — i.  e.  everybody  that  adhered 
to  him.  whether  from  family  connection  or  interest. 
The  Latin  notits  may  occasionally  approximate  to 
the  idea  of  the  Hebrew  term  even  more  closely  than 
the  Greek  -yvJipifios  \  not  so  much,  however,  in 
(Jatull.  lxxix.  4  [sitrifi  riotorum  basia  repeierit),  as 
h  f.iv.  iii.  44,  where,  with  reference  to  the  violence 
done  to  Virginia,  is  said  :  nolos  gratia  (patris  el 
iponsi)  turbam  indignitas  rei  viryini  cow  that. 

Th(   fact  is  emphasized  that   Boaz  was  only  a 

iJTXJ        This  not  only  explains  a  certain  remote- 


ness of  Naomi  from  him,  but  it  makes  the  piety, 
which  notwithstanding  the  distance  (manifest  also 
from  ch.  iii.  12)  of  the  relationship,  performs  what 
the  narrative  goes  on  to  relate,  more  conspicuously 
great  than  it  would  appear  if,  according  to  an  un- 
founded conjecture  of  Jewish  expositors,  he  were 
held  to  be  the  son  of  Elimelech's  brother. 

A  valiant  hero.  These  words  are  applied  to 
Boaz  in  no  other  sense  than  to  Gideon  (Judg.  vi. 
12),  Jephthah  (xi.  1 ),  and  others,  and  have  no  refer- 
ence to  his  wealth  and  property.  He  was  a  strong 
and  able  man  in  Israel,  in  war  and  in  peace. 
Probably  he  had  distinguished  himself  in  conflicts 
of  Israel  against  enemies,  perhaps  against  Moab. 
The  ancestor  of  David  is,  as  the  Midrash  (Ruth  31, 
d)   remarks,  rightly  thus   described.      His  name, 

Boaz  (T5?3l,  is  to  be  explained  by  reference  to 
the  name  of  one  of  the  pillars  erected  by  Solomon, 
and  called  Boaz,  while  the  other  was  named  Jachin 
(cf.  my  Gold.  Thron  Salomo's,  p.  45).     It  is  not  a 

compound  of  fj?  "t3>  but  a  contraction  of  '2""i?, 
"  son  of  strength,  of  enduring  vigor."  The  signifi- 
cation alacritas  (Ges.,  Keil,  etc.),  would  hardly  be 
applicable  to  the  pillar. 


H0.MILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

The  same  characteristic  is  ascribed  to  Boaz  as  to 
Gideon,  and  to  David.  But  concerning  his  warlike 
deeds  nothing  is  related.  In  Israel,  however,  there 
was  no  valor,  properly  so  called,  except  such  as 
sprang  from  the  acknowledgment  of  the  living  God. 
The  word  is  not  applied  to  wild  battle-rage,  but  to 
moral  strength,  which  valiantly  repels  distress  and 
dishonor,  as  Abraham  drew  the  sword  for  his  coun- 
try against  foreign  oppressors.  Boaz  was  a  hero  in 
war  through  his  virtue  in  peace.  And  this  virtue 
conies  so  clearly  to  view  in  the  Book  of  Ruth,  that 
the  narrator  could  justly  add  :  he  was  a  brave  man. 
For  morally  brave  he  shows  himself  in  every  rela- 
tion :  1.  as  landlord;  2.  as  confessor  of  God;  3. 
as  man  of  action  ;  and  hence  he  receives  the  reward 
both  of  him  who  dispenses  blessings  and  of  him 
who  receives  them. 

[Fuller  :  "  This  first  verse  presents  us  with  twe 
remarkable  things  :  1 .  Poor  Naomi  was  allied  to 
powerful  Boaz.  2.  Boaz  was  both  a  powerful  man 
and  a  godly  man."  —  Tb.J 


CHAPTER   II.   2-17.  27 


Verses  2-17. 
The  Reward  of  Faithfulness  begin*. 

2  And  Ruth  the  Moabitess  said  unto  Naomi,  Let  me  now  go  to  the  field,  and  glea: 
ears  of  corn 1  after  him  in  whose  sight  I  shall  find  grace.     And  she  said  unto  her, 

3  Go.  my  daughter.  And  she  went,  and  came,  and  gleaned  in  the  field  after  the 
reapers:  and  her  hap  was  to  light  on  a  [the]  part  of  the  field2  belonging  unto  Boaz, 

4  who  was  of  the  kindred  [family]  of  Elimelech.  And  behold.  Boaz  came  from  Beth- 
lehem,  and  said  unto  the   reapers.   The   Lord   [Jehovah]   be  with  you :  and   they 

5  answered  him,  The  Lord  [Jehovah]  bless  thee.     Then   said   Boaz  [And  Boaz  said] 

6  unto  his  servant  that  was  set  over  the  reapers.  Whose  damsel  is  this  ?  And  the 
servant  that  was  set  over  the  reapers  answered  and  said,  It  is  the8  Moabitish  dain- 

7  sel  that  came  back  with  Naomi  out  of  the  country  [territories]  of  "Moab  :  And 
she  said,  I  pray  you  [thee],  let  me  glean  and  [I  will]  gather  after  the  reapers  among 
the  sheaves:  so  she  came,  and   hath  continued  even  from  the  morning  until  now, 

8  that  *  she  tarried  a  little  in  the  house.  Then  said  Boaz  [And  Boaz  said]  unto  Ruth, 
Hearest  thou  not.  my  daughter  ?     Go  not  to  glean  in  another  field,  neither  go  from 

9  hence,  but  abide  here  fast  by  my  maidens  :  Let  thine  eyes  be  on  the  field  that  they 
do  reap,  and  go  thou  [fearlessly]  after  them  :  have  I  not  charged  the  young  men  that 
they  shall  not  touch  [molest]  thee?  and  when  thou  art  athirst,5  go  unto  the  vessels, 

10  and  drink  of  that  which  the  young  men  have  drawn.  Then  she  fell  on  her  face,  and 
bowed  herself  to  the  ground,  and  said  unto  him,  Why  have  I  found  grace  in  thine 
eyes,  that  thou  shouldest  take  knowledge  [friendly  notice]  of  me,  seeing  I  am  a  stranger  ? 

11  And  Boaz  answered  and  said  unto  her,  It  hath  fully  been  shewed  me.  all  that 
thou  hast  done  unto  thy  mother-in  law  since  the  death  of  thine  husband :  and  how 
thou  hast  left  thy  father  and  thy  mother,  and  the  land  of  thy  nativity,  and  art  come 

12  unto  a  people  which  thou  knewest  uot  heretofore.  The  Lord  [Jehovah]  recom- 
pense thy  work,  and  a  full  [complete]  reward  be  given  thee  of  the  Lord  [Jehovah] 

13  God  of  Israel,  under  whose  wings  thou  art  come  to  trust  [seek  refuge].  Then  she 
said,  Let  me  find  favour 6  in  thy  sight,  my  lord  ;  for  that  thou  hast  comforted  me, 
and  for  that  thou  hast  spoken  friendly  unto  [to  the  heart  of]  thine  handmaid,  though 

14  I  be  not  like  unto  one  of  thy  handmaidens.  And  Boaz  said  unto  her,  At  meal-time T 
come  thou  hither,  and  eat  of  the  bread,  and  dip  thy  morsel  in  the  vinegar.  And  she 
sat  beside  the  reapers  :  and  lie  reached  her  parched  corn,  and  she  did  eat.  and  was 

15  sufficed  [satisfied],  and  left  [over].  And  when  she  was  risen  up  to  glean,  Boaz 
commanded  his  young  men,  saying.  Let  her  glean  even  among  [between]  the  sheaves, 

16  and  reproach  her  not:  And  let  fall  [pull  out]  8  also  some  of  [from]  the  handfulls 
[bundles]  of  purpose  for  her,  and  leave  them  [it],  that  she  may  glean  them  \it],  and 

17  rebuke  her  not.  So  she  gleaned  in  the  field  until  even,  and  beat  out  that  she  had 
gleaned  :  and  it  was  about  an  ephah  of  barley. 

TEXTUAL    AND    GRAMMATICAL. 

[i  Ver.2.  —  C^bati'S  nfcjvbSI  :  lit-  ,:and  glean,  among  the  ears."     The  construction  is  exactly  parallel  to  th»t 

in  ver.  7  :  i.  t.  ntlpbs  is  used  absolutely,  without  an  accus.,  as  frequently  in  our  Book  and  elsewhere.  The  idea  is, 
Let  me  gather  (sc.  some  ears)  among  those  that  are  left  lying  in  the  field  by  the  harvesters.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  3.  —  nTti'n  fipbn  :  "  the  field-portion,"  i.  e.  that  part  of  the  grain-fields  about  Bethlehem  that  belonged 
to  Boaz.  rr  Though  gardens  and  vineyards  are  usually  surrounded  by  a  stone  wall  or  hedge  of  prickly  pear,  the  grain 
fields,  on  the  contrary,  though  they  belong  to  different  proprietors,  are  not  separated  by  any  inclosure  from  each  other. 
The  boundary  between  them  is  indicated  by  heaps  of  small  stones,  or  sometimes  by  single  upright  stones  placed  at  inter- 
vals of  a  rod  or  more  from  each  other  "  (Hackett,  Must,  of  Scripture,  p.  167).  In  rHpO  ™T/.*1>  ut'  "  aer  haP  hap- 
pened,"' 7"HJ7tp  is  the  subject  of  ~^)*\  cf.  Eccles.  ii.  14.  (Tlt^n  np_?n  >8  the  accus.  of  place,  cf.  Ges.  118,  1. 
— Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  6.  —  Op  :  "  She  is  a  Moabitish  maiden,  who  came  back  with  Naomi  from,"  etc.  This  supposes  that  n3t£T1 
Is,  is  the  accentuation  makes  it,  and  against  which  nothing  is  to  be  said  here,  the  third  fem.  perfect,  cf.  the  note  on  ch. 
I.  22.  Thus  taken,  the  answer  does  not  assume  that  Boaz  is  acquainted  with  the  return  of  Naomi.  The  B.  V.  may. 
lowever,  be  justified  by  taking   ~T"~twr"T   as  a  participle,  cf.  Ges.  Ill,  2,  a  — Tr.1 


28 


THE  BOOK  OF   RUTH. 


[4  Ver.  7. —  HT  is  joined  by  Dr.  Cassel  to  nj-lH""!^!,  as  adv.  of  time  (so  also  Gesenius  and  Fiirst,  cf.  Lexiea 
.  v.):  "and  until  now  her  resting  (cf.  below)  in  the  house  was  little."  But  this  unnecessarily  disturbs  the  accentua* 
tion.     Better  translate :  "  this  her  sitting  in  the  house  (rPiSH,  accus.  of  place)  is  but  for  a  little  "  (tS^tt,  adv.  oi 

tccus.  of  time).     HT    rW2tE7  is  an  Aramseizing  of  the  more  regular  Hebrew  H-TH  H/HSE?.  cf.  Ew.  293,  b,  and  the 
v         t  :  •  t  :   •  ' 

Ltxica,  s.  v.  iTr.—  On  TISDSI,  in  the  preceding  clause,  see  Ges.  126,  6.  Ruth  says  :  Pray,  permit  me  to  glean,  and 
and  (in  consequence  of  this  permission)  I  will  gather,  etc.  —  Tr.] 

T5  Ver.  9.  — D!i!i,  from  KOtJ,  but  inflected  as  if  from  a  form  HOS,  cf.  Ges.  75,  Rem.  21,  c.  On  the  use  of  the 
word  as  perfect,  ct  on  ch.  1.  12.  On  the  perfects  £127711  and  nVHHJI,  Ges.  126,  Rem.  1 ;  and  on  the  imperf. 
7^— Mt27\    Ges.  127,  4,  b.      "")t2?MD  is  rendered   t(  out  of  which  "  by  Bertheau  and  Keil  (because  water-drawing  was 

ordinarily  done  by  women?);  but  in  that  case  the  more  natural  position  of  iTilttn  would  be  after  D^^SH, 
thus  :  and  out  of  what  the  young  men  draw  (drink),  drink  thou  (too).  —  Ta.J 

[0  Ver.  13.  —  N^DM  I  optative.  "  To  take  it  as  present  indicat.  :  I  find  favor,  as  is  done  by  Le  Clerc  and  Bertheau, 
Is  not  in  accordance  with  the  modesty  of  humility  which  Ruth  manifests  in  the  following  words  M  (Keil).  Nor  is  the 
word  expressive  of  a  permanent  state  or  condition,  which  would  justify  the  imperfect  indicative ,  as  is  the  case  with  the 
rPrlM  of  the  next  clause,  cf.  Ges.  127,  2.  —  Tr.] 

[7  *  Ver.  14.  —  According  to  the  accentuation  of  the  Masorites,  these  words  belong  to  the  preceding  clause  :  (t  And  Boas 
said  to  her  at  the  time  of  eating,  Come  hither,"  etc.  stT3,  from  C32,  an  anomalous  form  for  ''IT?,  as  !|tP2  for 
*m73  Josh.  iii.  9 ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  38.  The  second  accent,  merca,  is  here,  as  in  other  instances  (Gen.  xxviii.  2 ;  Num. 
xvii.  23,  etc.)  used  instead  of  metheg.  —  H7  without  mappik  as  in  Num.  xxxii.  42  ;  Zech.  v.  11.  —  Tr.] 

8  Ver.   16.  — ^rviPP'^tT.      The  use  of  7  7t£7  in  the  sense  "  to  draw  out  "  is  only  a  return  to  the  original  mean 

T  ~     T 

ing  of  the  word.  It  is  the  same  word  as  <rvAcuo,  which  also  originally  meant  to  draw  out,  for  it  was  from  the  drawing 
off  or  stripping  of  their  armor  from  the  slain  that  it  obtained  the  signification  (f  to  make  booty,  to  plunder."  [On  the  use 
of  the  infin.  const,  for  the  absol.  see  Ges.  131,  4,  Rem.  2.  —  TR] 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  2.  And  Euth,  the  Moabitess,  said  to 
Naomi.  Naomi  was  manifestly  in  need.  No  one 
seemed  to  help  her,  nor  had  she  the  heart  to  ask. 
It  is  but  too  clear  now  that  her  lot  would  have  been 
a  dismal  one,  if  at  her  return  Ruth  had  not  faith- 
fully clung  to  her.  But  this  young  woman's  fidel- 
ity shows  itself  now  also.  As  the  barley-harvest  is 
in  progress,  she  offers  to  go  to  the  field  and  ask  for 
permission  to  glean.  It  was  no  easy  offer.  Ruth 
was  probably  ignorant  of  those  provisions  of  the 
Israelitish  law  according  to  which  the  gleanings  of 
the  harvest-field  and  even  a  forgotten  sheaf  were 
to  be  left  to  the  poor  and  the  stranger,  the  widow 
and  the  orphan  (cf.  Lev.  xxiii.  22  ;  Deut.  xxiv.  19). 
At  least,  she  did  not  seem  to  expect  the  observance 
of  such  a  custom ;  for  she  hoped  to  obtain  permis- 
sion to  glean  from  the  possible  kindness  of  some 
proprietor.  But  at  best,  what  a  miserable  task  for 
the  once  happy  and  prosperous  widow  !  Possibly 
to  see  herself  treated  as  a  beggar,  harshly  addressed 
or  even  personally  maltreated  by  rude  reapers !  to 
pass  the  day  in  heat  and  distress,  in  order  at  even- 
ing, hungry  and  weary,  to  bring  home  a  little  bar- 
ley! For  this  then  she  had  left  paternal  house 
and  land,  in  order  in  deepest  misery  to  be  per- 
chance yet  also  abused  as  a  foreigner !  But  the 
love  she  cherishes,  makes  everything  easy  to  her. 
It  not  only  gives  utterance  to  good  words,  but 
it  carries  them  into  practice.  She  forgets  every- 
thing, in  order  now  to  remember  her  filial  duty  to 
Naomi.     And  Naomi  accepts  her  offer. 

Go,  my  daughter.  Until  now,  she  has  only 
silently  endured  every  expression  of  Ruth's  self- 
sacrifice.  She  had  indeed  ceased  to  dissuade  her 
from  going  with  her,  but  she  had  also  refrained 
from  encouraging   her.      Ruth  might  even  now, 

tfter  having  reached  Bethlehem,  experienced  the 
poverty  of  her  mother-in-law,  and  tasted  the  sense 

■  I'  strangeness  in  Israel,  have  returned  to  Monk 
]ir~    the   meekness   with   which,    instead   of  this. 


she  asks  permission  to  encounter  toil  and  misery 
for  her,  overcomes  in  Naomi  too  every  ulterior 
consideration.  Such  a  request  could  no  longer  be 
silently  accepted ;  nor  could  it  be  refused.  Naomi 
permits  her  to  glean  in  the  harvest-field.  Nor  was 
it  an  easy  thing  for  the  mother  to  give  this  consent. 
The  remarkable  characters  of  both  women  come 
here  also  nobly  to  view.  Ruth,  who  has  given  up 
everything,  is  humble  as  a  dutiful  child,  and  asks 
for  permission  to  give  up  more.  Naomi,  who  in 
her  highest  need  would  accept  nothing  from  Ruth, 
in  order  not  to  involve  her  in  the  same  distress, 
—  who  retains  her  maternal  authority  in  circum- 
stances of  want  in  which  people  generally  would 
deem  this  impossible,  —  has  no  other  reward  for 
Ruth's  self-sacrificing  disposition  than  that  she  is 
ready  to  accept  its  efforts  for  herself. 

Ver.  3.  And  she  lighted  providentially  on 
the  field  of  Boaz.     More  literally :  "  And  her  lot 

met  her  on  the  field  of  Boaz."     OP*3,  fat.  apoc. 

from  n^l|?,  S^i?,  occurrere.)  Ruth,  as  a  stranger 
in  Bethlehem,  knew  neither  persons  nor  properties. 
She  might  have  chanced  on  fields  of  strange  and 
unfriendly  owners.  Providence  so  ordered  it,  that 
without  knowing  it,  she  entered  the  field  of  one 
who  was  of  the  family  of  Elimelech.  and  therefore 
also  a  distant  relative  of  her  deceased  husband. 

Ver.  4  ff.  And  behold  Boaz  came  from  Bethle- 
hem. A  finer  picture  of  rural  harvest-scenes  is 
nowhere  extant.  We  hear,  as  it  were,  the  rustling 
of  the  reapers'  sickles.1  Behind  them  are  the  wo- 
men, binding  the  cut  grain  (ver.  8).  The  overseer's 
presence  promotes  industry  and  order  (ver.  5).  In 
case  of  thirst,  there  stand  the  water-vessels  at  no 
great  distance.  The  fields  surround  the  country- 
house  with  its  various  outbuildings,  where  the 
weary  may  find  a  moment's  rest  and  refreshment 

i  Cf.  Hosier,  i?.  xviii  550.  in  the  description  of  the  shield 
of  Achilles  :  "On  it  he  also  graved  a  field  thick  with  grain 
and  there  with  sharp  sickles  reapers  plied  their  task  " 


CHAPTER  II.  2-17. 


29 


At  meal-time,  the  laborers  are  supplied  (as  at  the 
present  day,  cf.  Rob.  ii.  50),  with  roasted  grain '- 
and  bread."-  The  latter  they  dip  in  a  refreshing 
drink,  consisting  of  vinegar  and  water,  with  per- 
haps some  oil  mixed  in  it.8 

But  rural  life  has  not  in  itself  that  paradisaic 
happiness  which  Virgil  contrasts  so  enthusiastically 
with  the  luxuriant  and  slavish  life  of  Rome.  It 
may  perhaps  be  true  that  a  country  population  is 
more  patient  of  labor  and  more  readily  contented 
with  small  means  ("  paliens  operum  exiguoqne  adsiteta 
juuemus,"  —  Georg.  ii.  472)  ;  but  it  is  only  when  a 
pious  and  godfearing  spirit  rules  in  the  hearts  of 
proprietor  and  dependents  that  it  is  good  to  live 
amid  the  quiet  scenes  and  rewardful  toil  of  the 
country.  Only  then,  too,  is  the  poet's  word  ap- 
plicable: "the  chaste  dwelling  preserves  virtue" 
(casta  pudicitiam  servat  domus). 

An  example  of  such  a  country  life  meets  us  here 
in  the  good  times  of  Israel.  Boaz  himself,  when 
the  day  has  considerably  advanced,  comes  to  look 
after  his  people  in  the  field.  His  greeting  is,  "  Je- 
hovah be  with  you  !  "  Their  answer,  "  Jehovah 
bless  thee  !  "  Nor  is  this,  in  his  mouth,  merely 
a  customary  form  :  the  reality  of  his  piety  is  mani- 
fest from  his  life  and  works.  Hence,  also,  as  the 
master,  so  the  servant.  The  overseer  knows  the 
benignity  of  his  master,  and  imitates  it.  This 
appears  as  soon  as  Boaz  comes  and  notices  the 
strange  maiden.  That  he  does  this  at  once,  is  only 
a  new  feature  in  the  rural  picture.  On  the  fields 
of  Boaz,  the  poor  were  not  hindered  in  their  legal 
privilege  of  gleaning.  But  the  proprietor  knows 
not  only  his  work-people,  but  the  needy  also. 
Ruth  he  had  never  yet  seen.  It  may  be  supposed 
also  that  her  modest  and  reserved  bearing  served 
at  once  to  mark  her.  She  who  had  so  long  been 
mistress  herself,  had  not  the  look  of  those  who 
have  grown  bold  in  beggary.  Such  a  one  as  she 
was  must  have  sufficiently  manifested  her  supe- 
riority over  the  female  servants  by  the  natural 
charm  and  grace  of  her  presence,  even  though  she 
dressed  in  the  same  style  and  engaged  in  similar 
toil.  She  could  not  fail  to  surprise  Boaz,  a-  he 
surveyed  his  people  and  their  labor.  He  turns  to 
his  overseer  with  the  natural  inquiry,  "  Whose  is 
this  damsel  ?  "  It  was  in  accordance  with  national 
custom  to  ask,  not,  "  Who  is  this  damsel "  —  for 
that  was  of  comparatively  little  importance, —  but, 
Whence  is  she  ?  how  comes  she  here  ?  to  what 
estate  does  she  belong  ?  With  the  overseer's  an- 
swer begins  the  beautiful  delineation  of  the  two 
principal   persons  of  the   narrative   in  their   first 

1  [The  following  remarks  on  parched  corn  are  from  Dr. 
Thomson's  The  Land  and  the  Book  (ii.  510) :  "  It  is  made 
thus  :  a  quantity  of  the  best  ears,  not  too  ripe,  are  plucked 
with  the  stalks  attached.  These  are  tied  into  small  parcels, 
a  blazing  fire  is  kindled  with  dry  grass  and  thorn  bushes, 
and  the  corn-heads  are  held  in  it  until  the  chaff  is  mostly 
burnei  off.  The  grain  is  thus  sufficiently  roasted  to  be 
eaten,  and  it  is  a  favorite  article  all  over  the  country.  When 
travelling  in  harvest-time,  my  muleteers  have  very  often 
thus  prepared  parched  coru  in  the  evenings  after  the  tent 
las  been  pitched.  Nor  is  the  gathering  of  these  green  ears 
for  parching  ever  regarded  as  stealing.  After  it  has  been 
roasted,  it  is  rubbed  out  in  the  hand  and  eaten  as  there  is 
occasion.''  —  Tr.] 

z  Which  they  probably  consumed  under  the  shade  of 
beautiful  trees,  as  in  Goethe's  picture  (Herm.  u.  Doroth.)  : 
"It  (a  tree  of  which  he  is  speaking)  was  visible  far  and 
»i*r  :  under  it  the  reapers  were  accustomed  to  enjoy  their 
noonday  meal." 

3  In  describing  his  servitude  in  Egypt,  M.  Heberer  says 
iRoeenm'uller.  Morgenland,  iii.  68)  :  "  It  is  truly  incredible 
how  the  oisruit,  eaten  with  vinegar  and  oil,  strengthens  the  I 


meeting.  The  overseer  knew  Ruth;  and  it  was 
not  necessary  to  tell  Boaz  much  about  her,  since 
the  return  of  Naomi  had  been  much  talked  of. 
But  it  is  honorable  to  him  that  he  at  once  recom- 
mends her  by  praising  her  diligence.  Since  morn- 
ing she  had  not  ceased  to  glean,  —  had  scarcely 
rested  a  little  in  the  house.4  This  praise  of  her 
diligence  included  praise  of  the  propriety  and  re- 
serve of  her  demeanor.  She  was  very  unlike  other 
gleaners.  Those  were  apt  to  chatter  and  do  many 
other  things  beside  that  for  which  they  came. 

Ver.  8.  And  Boaz  said  to  Ruth,  Go  not  to 
glean  in  another  field.  The  interest  of  Boaz, 
who  had  already  heard  of  the  Moabitess,  especially 
as  Naomi  was  at  least  something  more  to  him  than 
an  entire  stranger,  —  a  fact  either  unknown  to  the 
overseer,  or  which,  like  a  good  and  sagacious  serv- 
ant, he  discreetly  passed  over,  —  could  not  but  in- 
crease by  reason  of  the  praise  bestowed  on  Ruth. 
He  therefore  went  to  her,  to  speak  with  her  person- 
ally. In  the  case  of  another  maiden  of  whom  he 
had  heard  similar  good  reports,  he  would  have 
given  a  few  favorable  directions  concerning  her  to 
his  overseer.  But  here  he  was  met  by  various  pe- 
culiar considerations.  Was  it  Naomi,  the  widow 
of  a  relative  of  his,  who  was  forced  to  lay  claim  to 
the  widow's  rights  in  the  harvest-fields  of  Israel, 
or  was  it  the  Moabitess,  who,  for  having  attached 
herself  with  all  her  heart  to  Israel,  now  com 
manded  the  favor  of  the  Israelite?  Both  these 
thoughts  are  at  work  in  the  noble  mind  of  Boaz. 
He  recognizes  the  existence  of  a  certain  relation- 
ship, the  benefit  of  which  is  due  to  Ruth.  It  is 
not  a  common  maid-servant  who  stands  before  him. 
Had  he  been  actuated  by  the  spirit  of  modern 
sentimentality,  he  would  probably  have  been 
ashamed  of  her.  He  would  have  offered  her  a 
piece  of  money,  and  sent  her  away,  that  it  might 
not  become  known  that  this  Moabitish  beggar  is 
his  relative!  He  would  at  all  events  not  have 
allowed  her  to  go  on  gleaning  !  But  according  to 
the  ancient  delicate  and  religious  view,  he  cannot 
act  thus.  Nothing  has  been  asked  of  him ;  conse- 
quently, he  has  no  right  to  wound  the  self-respect 
of  others.  The  privilege  of  gleaning  belongs  of 
right  to  the  widow  and  the  stranger.  It  is  not 
well  that  she  needs  it ;  but  needing  it,  he  cannot 
hinder  her  from  using  it.  Even  while  he  admits  her 
relationship,  he  can  only  support  her  in  this  right, 
and  enlarge  its  advantages.  And  this  is  what  he 
does.  Ruth  had  modestly  gleaned  at  a  distance 
from  the  reapers  and  binders.5  He  calls  her  nearer, 
and  says  :  "  Go  not  to  glean  in  another  field."    In 

weary  and  exhausted  system  and  restores  its  powers."  The 
drink  of  the  Roman  soldiers,  called  posca,  consisted  of  wa- 
ter and  vinegar.  Hadrian,  to  encourage  his  troops,  used  it 
himself  (Spartian.  Vit.  Hadr  ch.  x).  Of  a  different  nature 
is  the  food  which  in  Virgil  {Eel.  ii.  10)  is  prepared  for  ths 
reapers  (rapido  ferris  messoribus  cz^ttt)  and  others,  with  gar- 
lic and  thyme.  Some  other  learned  observations  see  in 
Serarius,  Qiicest.  xsiv.  p.  738. 

*  iT^H  nj^^tr.  The  allusion  can  only  be  to  t 
field-building,  since  otherwise  her  sitting  in  it  could  not 
be  known  to  "the  laborers.  And  as  the  :' sitting  "  forms  a 
contrast  with  her  laboring,  it  must  be  taken  in  the  sense  of 
"  resting."  In  the  Sept.  rendering  iv  aypiL.  aypos  standi 
for  a  building  in  the  field,  villa ,  cast™  in  agro. 

5    There    is    a   difference    when,    according    to    ver.  7, 

she   gleans  near  the   sheaves,   after  the  reapers,     ^PH 

E^Q3?2  n^-^rvH,  aDd  when,  in  ver.  15,  she  is  al 
■  t-t:t  -  :    '    - 

lowed  to  glean  "  between  the  sheaves,"    D^tt^H    V2. 

•  TV  T        *      ■  * 

among  the  reapers 


no 


THE   BOOK  OF   RUTH. 


these  words  he  acknowledges  the  first  degree  of  the 
interest  to  which  his  relationship  binds  him.  Both 
for  her  sake  —  for  would  she  everywhere  have  such 
favorable  opportunities  to  glean  as  he  gave  her  i  — 
and  also  for  his  own  !  That  which  is  a  benefit  to 
her,  is  also  seemly  with  respect  to  himself  as  re- 
lated to  her,  in  order  that  Elimelech's  daughter-in- 
law  may  not  wander  from  field  to  field  like  one 
utterly  helpless. 

Nor  go  from  hence,  but  keep  here,  with  my 
maidens.  He  has  called  her  to  him  where  he 
stands,  near  the  reapers.  Only  on  this  supposition 
are  these  words  intelligible.  Immediately  behind 
the  reapers,  came  the  maidens  who  bound  the 
Traill.  The  gleaner  who  was  allowed  to  approach 
nearest  the  latter,  had  the  best  opportunity.  Ruth 
had  hitherto  kept  back,  which  perhaps  allowed 
others  to  anticipate  her  and  take  away  the  best. 
Boaz  bids  her  come  close  up  to  the  binders,  and  to 
stay  there.1  He  allows  her  to  glean  indeed,  but  he 
makes  her  gleaning  more  productive. 

Ver.  9.  Keep  thine  eyes  on  the  field  that 
they  reap,  and  go  after  them,  etc.  He  takes 
care  not  only  to  provide  her  an  abundant  gleaning, 
but  also  to  ensure  the  safety  of  her  person.  He  is 
not  dealing  with  a  gleaner  of  the  common  class. 
Close  by  the  reapers  is  no  doubt  a  good  place  for 
fnnling  ears,  but  it  involves  also  the  possibility  of 
rude  treatment.  Her  appearance  may  have  been 
such  as  would  not  unlikely  provoke  the  coarse  jests 
with  which  such  peasant  laborers  were  perhaps  in 
the  habit  of  assailing  women.  She  would  prefer, 
therefore,  as  he  foresees,  to  keep  herself  back,  rather 
than  work  in  their  immediate  neighborhood.  Be 
not  concerned,  he  says :  I  have  already  given 
charge  that  no  one  touch  thee.2  Act  without  fear ; 
and  when  thou  thirstest,  go  boldly  and  drink. 

Ver.  10.  Then  she  fell  on  her  face,  etc.  It 
may  be  clearly  seen  here,  that  only  such  as  can  ex- 
ercise love,  understand  how  to  receive  it.  No  one 
is  humbler  than  he  who  truly  gives  from  love  — 
of  that  Ruth  is  a  proof;  and  for  that  reason,  hu- 
mility never  shows  itself  more  beautiful,  than 
when  love  receives.  Ruth  had  made  the  greatest 
sacrifices,  although  no  one  had  a  right  to  expect 
them  from  her,  and  is  withal  so  unassuming,  as 
not  to  look  for  anything  from  others.  Most  peo- 
ple in  her  place  would  have  made  the  first  favor 
shown  them,  the  occasion  for  saying  that  in  truth 
they  were  not  at  all  used  to  such  work.  Their 
thanks  would  have  been  combined  with  complaints 
and  accusing  insinuations  about  the  distress  in 
which  they  found  themselves,  although  they  had 
exchanged  the  people  and  God  of  Moab  for  those 
of  Israel.  Ruth's  love  did  not  spring  from  selfish- 
ness, and  hence  did  not  give  birth  to  any  proud  self- 
consciousness.  Instead  of  a  sigh  that  she  who  had 
said,  "  thy  people  is  my  people,  thy  God  my  God," 
could  scarcely  by  weary  toil  procure  sustenance  in 
Israel,  she  utters  her  humble  thanks  to  Boaz : 
How  is  it  that  I,  a  stranger,  obtain  such  favor ! 

i    The   words    M-ID     "'"JDSJTtV?     [on   the   form 

^^^/■l,  cf.  Ges.  47.  Rem.  1]  would  be  a  useless  repetition, 
If  they  did  Dot  express  the  idea  that  she  is  not  to  leave  the 
place  where  she  now  stands  before  him  (and  whither  he  prob- 
ably caused  her  to  be  called ),as  being  favorable  to  her  success. 
•  Dr.  Thomson.  Tim  Land  an/I  the  Book,  ii.  610,  ex- 
plains the  charge  of  Boaz  to  the  reapers  in  almost  the  same 
language  .as  our  author,  and  adds:  "Such  precautions  are 
not  out  of  place  'it  thb  day  The  reapers  are  gathered  from 
all  parts  of  the  country,  and  largely  from  the  ruder  class, 
and,  living  far  from  home,  throw  off  all  restraint,  and 
(five  free  license  to  their  tongues,  if  nothing  more.''  —  Tr.] 


Instead  of  taking  it  as  a  matter  of  course  tha 
Boaz  should  especially  regard  ( "* .  .)  her,  being 
a  stranger,  she  is  so  unassuming  as  to  deem  tin? 
very  fact  an  enhancement  of  his  kindness. 

Ver.  1 1 .  And  Boaz  said,  It  hath  been  told  me, 
etc.  The  answer  which  Boaz  gives,  is  not  simply 
that  of  the  landed  proprietor,  but  of  the  Israelite. 
He  speaks  out  of  the  abundance  of  the  faith  of 
Israel.  We  feel  that  he  acts  as  he  does  from  a 
sense  of  his  duty  as  an  Israelite.  The  Jewish  ex- 
positors have  identified  Boaz  with  Ilizan  the  judge 
(Judg.  xii.  8),  because  the  latter  also  was  of  Beth- 
lehem—  manifestly  the  northern  Bethlehem,  how- 
ever, and  not  that  of  Judah  (cf.  the  Comment,  oil 
Judges).  But  in  enunciating  such  i  pinions,  ihey 
have  their  eyes  more  on  the  spirit  than  on  the  his- 
torical facts!  They  only  felt  themselves  bound  to 
point  out  that,  since  Boaz,  like  other  Judges,  is 
said  to  have  been  a  "  valiant  hero,"  and  is  evi- 
dently rich  and  highly  esteemed,  he  must  also  have 
exercised  the  functions  of  the  judge.  Literally, 
thi-  cannot  he  maintained;  for,  had  it  been  the 
case,  our  Book  would  not  have  been  silent  on  the 
subject.  But  during  the  so-called  period  of  the 
Judges,  there  were  certainly  other  able  men  in  Is- 
rael than  the  heroes  mentioned  in  the  Book  of 
Judges,  who  filled  the  office  of  judge  in  their  cities 
(cf  Com.  on  Judg.  ii.  16);  and  Boaz  would  cer- 
tainly furnish  us  with  a  beautiful  likeness  of  one  of 
these.  In  his  words,  at  least,  there  is  undeniably 
the  breathing  of  a  pious,  national  consciousness, 
such  as  becomes  an  Israelitish  family-head  and 
hero  in  the  presence  of  a  recent  proselyte  to  his 
faith  and  people. 

All  that  thou  hast  done  unto  thy  mother-in- 
law,  etc.  The  words  of  Boaz  here  clearly  state 
what,  in  accordance  with  the  delicacy  of  ancient 
narration,  was  not  expressly  said  above.  Ruth 
has  nowhere  hinted  that  she  was  showing  kindness 
to  her  mother-in-law  in  going  with  her  to  Israel. 
All  she  said,  was,  "  I  will  not  leave  thee."  When 
Naomi  arrives  at  Bethlehem,  and  everybody  is 
eager  with  curiosity,  the  lamentations  in  which  sl.e 
breaks  out  are  indeed  recorded,  but  not  the  words  in 
which  she  praised  her  daughter-in-law.  Neverthe- 
less, she  fully  appreciated  what  Ruth  did  for  her. 
This  was  the  very  reason  why  she  at  first  refused 
to  accept  her  sacrifice.  Afterwards,  however,  she 
gratefully  recounted  her  obligations  to  her  daugh- 
ter-in-law, but,  as  discreet  minds  are  wont  to  do, 
behind  her  back.  Boaz  could  have  derived  his 
knowledge  only  from  narrations  proceeding  from 
Naomi  herself. 

The  merit  which  Boaz  imputes  to  Ruth  is  of  a 
twofold  nature.  Induced  by  affection,  she  has  left 
the  highest  possessions  of  life.  She  was  no  or- 
phan, she  was  not  homeless;  she  had  what  she 
needed,  but  left  all,  and  that  for  something  un- 
known, the  value  of  which  she  was  not  able  to  esti- 
mate. "  Thou  earnest,"  he  says,  "  to  a  people  which 
yesterday4    and    the   day  before   yesterday    (i.    e 

s  It  is  remarkable  that  this  belongs  to  the  same  root  with 
^"133   "  stranger,''  which  also  occurs  in  the  address  of  Kuth 

In  the  Hiph.  "VTH,  and  the  adject,  form  ",^~".  the  two 
offshoots  of  the  radical  signification  appear  in  juxtaposition 
to  each  other,  as  in  the  German  i/m.rscheiden  (to  distin- 
guish) and  au.vscheiden  (to  separate). 

<  V"l~ F\  is  an  abbreviation  of  T»C  HK.  The  ex- 
planation becomes  clearer  by  comparison  with  other  lan- 
guages. The  Greek  ^fit'l  (t*9«).  the  Latin  heri  (halmua) 
and  the  German  ?«lmi  (Goth,  gislra),  may  all  be  recognized 


CHAPTER   n.    2-17. 


larmerly)  thou  didst  not  know."  How?  had  she 
not  known  her  family,  Naomi,  and  her  own  hus- 
band, who  were  of  Israel  ?  But  this  family  lived 
in  Moab,  where  Israel's  law  was  not  in  force.  The 
national  usages  and  institutions  which  had  been 
impressed  upon  Israel  by  Israel's  God,  she  did  not 
know.  And  notwithstanding  this,  she  had  said, 
"  Thy  people  is  my  people,  thy  God  my  God." 

Ver.  12.  Jehovah  recompense  thy  work.  As 
Boaz  praises  a  double  merit  in  Ruth,  so  he  gives  a 
double  form  to  his  wish  for  her.  First  he  says, 
generally,  "  Jehovah  recompense  thy  work."  In- 
dependently of  Naomi's  connection  with  Israel, 
Ruth's  love  for  her  mother-in-law,  for  whose  sake 
she  has  left  parents  and  native  land,  deserves  the 
reward  of  God.  But  she  came  to  Israel  with  Na- 
omi, and  for  her  sake  has  trustfully  connected  her- 
self with  a  people  whose  laws  she  did  not  know, 
and  whose  character  she  has  only  seen  mirrored 
forth  in  her  husband  and  his  mother.  For  this 
love  and  trust  may  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  as 
he  expressly  adds,  reward  thee !  Jehovah  is  known 
in  Israel.  Whoever  accepts  him,  may  build  on 
Him.  He  covers  with  his  wings,  him  who  confides 
in  Him  and  sets  Ms  hopes  on  Him  (Ps.  xci.  1  ff.), 
Ruth  has  come  trustfully  expecting  to  be  able  to 
live  in  Israel  with  Naomi  She  has  brought  noth- 
ing with  her;  has  left  everything.  They  have 
come,  both  poor  ;  and  have  scarcely  what  is  neces- 
sary to  sustain  life.  Nevertheless,  for  her  love's 
sake,  she  dared  to  make  the  God  of  Israel  her  God. 
Like  Abraham,  leaving  all,  she  went  abroad.  And 
as  to  Abraham  God  said,  "  I  am  thy  great  reward  " 
(Gen.  xv.  1),  so  Boaz  wishes  that  God  may  be  to 
her  a  full  reward.  A  "full  reward,"  abundant  as 
her  love,  so  that  she  shall  miss  nothing,  but  recover 
all ;  and  so  that  in  her  it  may  be  seen,  how  those 
are  entertained  who  shelter  themselves  beneath 
His  wings.  Boaz  does  not  discourse  as  one  would 
speak  to  a  Moabitish  beggar.  Having  heard  who 
she  is,  he  looks  upon  her  with  eyes  full  of  joy  over 
her  pious  actions.  He  speaks  to  her  as  a  priest 
and  prophet.  And  since  he  spoke  from  the  en- 
thusiasm  of  piety,  and  she  was  deserving,  his  words 
found  fulfillment.  She  received  a  reward  which 
was  not  only  full,  but  which  completed  and  wholly 
filled  her,  all  of  which   is  implied  in   the  words 

tfow)  and  rrabtp. 

Ver.  1 3  ff.  May  I  find  favor  in  thy  sight ;  for 
thou  hast  comforted  me.  The  impression  of  the 
words  of  Boaz  must  have  been  very  grateful  to  the 
humble  mind  of  Ruth.  It  was  the  first  sunbeam 
that  broke  through  the  grief  and  tears  of  many 
weeks.  Hitherto,  she  had  tasted  only  parting  sor- 
n  '\v.  She  had  suffered  at  the  grave  of  her  husband, 
suffered  on  the  way  from  the  land  which  held  the 
dwelling  of  her  parents,  and  her  sufferings  were  not 
yet  at  an  end  when  she  reached  Israel.  There  she 
had  hitherto  suffered  from  the  sense  of  loneliness. 
Everybody  talked  of  her  as  the  "  Moabitess."  She 
was  poor  to  beggary.  Now,  for  the  first  time,  she 
is  addressed  about  the  God  of  Israel  and  his  grace, 
and  hears  the  voice  of  blessing  from  one  of  that 
people  with  members  of  which  she  has  endured  so 
much.  The  full  import  of  his  words  her  humble 
heart  does  not  presume  to  appropriate.  But  the 
kindliness  and  benevolence  of  the  speaker's  voice, 

n  the  Sanskrit  hjas  (Benf.  ii.  208).  Jos  (in  hjas)  is,  "the 
lay,"  and  the  h  is  the  demonstrative  article  pointing  back- 
ward, cf.  Lat.  tile  ;  so  that  hjas,  and  the  other  cognate  forms, 
liquify,  "  that   day,"  i.  e.  "the  former  day."     The  forma- 

aon  of    7ID1HS  is  analogous.    7"Vt2  (  7:1T2)  is  equivalent 


is  for  her  like  the  sound  of  a  bubbling  spring  in 
the  desert  to  the  thirsty.  I  have  long  been  sad.  she 
intends  to  say ;  thou  hast  comforted  me.  I  look 
for  no  reward ;  but  thou  hast  spoken  to  the  heart 
of  thy  servant,  that  was  full  of  grief  and  anguish 
Her  phraseology  also  indicates  her  sincere  humility. 
"  May  I  find  favor  in  thy  sight,"  she  says,  by  way 
of  humble  introduction  to  her  grateful  acknowl- 
edgment of  the  comfort  he  has  imparted  to  her. 
It  is  a  formula  expressive  of  the  reverence  she  feels 
for  Boaz.  She  invokes  his  favor,  that  she  may 
tell  him  how  his  words  have  refreshed  her.  Who 
ever  has,  like  her,  left  everything,  in  order  to  live 
in  Israel,  will  feel  that  the  highest  and  best  utter- 
ance she  could  make,  when  for  the  first  time  she 
tasted  the  kindness  of  Israel,  was  gratitude  for  the 
comfort  experienced  A  word  of  love  comes  on  a 
loving  heart  like  hers,  long  afflicted  by  sorrow, 
like  morning  dews  on  a  thirsty  field. 

And  yet  I  am  not  as  one  of  thy  handmaidens.1 
No  one  can  speak  so  well  and  beautifully  as  an 
unassuming  person.  Ruth  manifests  no  conscious- 
ness of  having  done  anything  special.  Boaz  she 
thinks  is  doubtless  equally  kind  and  good  to  all  his 
people.  So  much  the  more  is  it  her  part  to  be 
grateful  that  he  has  also  been  kind  to  her,  who 
does  not,  as  they,  belong  to  his  household,  nor  even 
to  his  people.  It  might  be  thought  strange  that 
Boaz  says  nothing  to  her  of  his  relationship  to  her 
husband.  But  if  he  thought  of  it,  he  purposely 
kept  silent  about  it.  He  showed  her  kindness,  not 
because  she  was  distantly  related  to  him,  but  solely 
because  of  her  excellence.  In  the  case  of  one  like 
Ruth,  he  needed  not  the  remembrance  of  kinship 
to  stir  him  up  to  take  interest  in  her.  It  was  not 
as  the  widow  of  his  kinsman  that  he  distinguished 
her  with  special  favor,  but  as  one  who  had  taken 
refuge  under  the  wings  of  Israel's  God.  Ruth 
likewise  did  not  know  what  Boaz  was  to  her  hus- 
band's family ;  nor  had  she  wasted  a  word  to  make 
him  aware  "that  she  had  ever  been  more  than  a 
maid-servant,  which,  had  she  done,  might  have 
brought  their  relationship  to  speech. 

The  answer  of  Ruth  raised  her  still  higher  in  the 
esteem  of  Boaz.  He  is  not  satisfied  with  the  pro- 
visions already  made  in  her  behalf.  He  bids  her 
join  in  the  common  meal,  and  helps  her  to  a  por- 
tion of  everything  on  hand.  Nor  is  he  satisfied  to 
let  her  have  merely  a  common  gleaning.  He  orders 
that  now  and  then  some  ears  be  intentionally 
drawn  out  of  the  "  bundles  "  and  left  for  her  to 
gather  up.  This  last  injunction  he  gives  to  the 
workmen  themselves,  not  merely  to  the  overseer. 

It  is  interesting  also  to  notice  the  different  ex- 
pressions in  which  he  forbids  any  rude  treatment 
of  Ruth  by  the  workpeople.  Above,  in  ver.  9,  he 
told  them  not  to  "  touch"  her.  In  ver.  15,  where 
she  receives  permission  also  to  glean  between  the 
sheaves,  he  tells  them  not  to  "  shame "  her,  in 
other  words,  to  say  things  to  her  that  would  make 
her  blush,  whether  they  referred  to  her  nationality 
or  to  the  special  favor  by  which  she  was  directed  to 
glean  close  behind  the  reapers.  In  ver.  1 6.  finally, 
having  ordered  the  people  even  to  pull  ears  out  of 
the  bundles  for  her,  he  charges  them  not  to  "  speak 

harshly  "  to  her  (~!?2),  or  to  scold  her,  on  account 
of  the  extra  trouble  which  this  order  might  occa 

to  "  former,"  while  i"lS,  as  pronoun,  "that,"  indicate! 
the  defined  former  day.  yesterday. 

1  [Rett.  :  "  With  this  clause  she  restricts  the  expresBiou 
f  thy  handmaid,'  which  she  has  just  use!  :  r  thou  bait 
spoken  to  the  heart  of  thy  handmaid.'  "  —  Tb.] 


32 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


jion  them.  It  is  necessary  to  distinguish  carefully 
between  "^JS  and  •f"l5?-  The  former  is  the 
-heaf,  already  bound  by  the  maid-servants,  and 
lying  on  the  ground ;  the  latter,1  is  the  bundle  as 
"  taken  up  "  and  still  held  in  the  arm,  manipulus 

Amid  all  the  unusual  favors  bestowed  on  her, 
Ruth  does  not  cease  for  a  moment  to  be  herself. 
Boaz  reached  or  caused  to  be  reached  to  her  an 
abundance  of  roasted  ears.  She  eats  and  is  satis- 
fied —  this  is  stated  in  order  to  indicate  the  abun 
dant  supply  ;  the  remainder  she  carefully  takes 
up  to  carry  home.  She  never  thinks  only  of  her- 
self. After  the  meal,  —  at  which  it  is  appropriate '' 
to  suppose  Boaz  to  be  present,  —  gleaning  is  an 
easier  task  than  before  his  coming ;  she  finds  ears 
in  plenty,  but  not  on  that  account  does  she  cease 
the  sooner.  She  gleans  till  evening,  takes  the 
pains,  too,  to  beat  out  what  she  has  gathered,  and 
carries  home  a  plentiful  harvest,  almost  an  ephah. 
It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  the  quantity,  still  less 
its  weight,  exactly,  but  it  was  considerable,  say 
fifty-five  pounds. 

HOMILETICAL   AND   PRACTICAL. 

"  Let  me  go  to  the  field  and  glean  ears  of  corn. " 
Ruth  manifested  her  confession  of  the  God  of  Israel 
not  merely  by  words  :  she  testifies  her  love  also  by 
deeds.  She  is  inclined  to  work  for  Naomi  as  well 
as  to  live  'with  her.  She  not  only  learned  to  pray 
to  God  with  her,  but  she  will  also  beg  for  her 
among  men.  Accordingly,  Naomi,  in  her  poverty, 
is  not  maintained  by  the  friends  of  her  family,  but 
by  the  love  of  her  proselyte  daughter-in-law.  What 
Ruth  had  never  done  in  Moab,  —  the  hard  service 
of  begging  at  the  hands  of  men,  and  of  gleaning 
in  the  hot  days  of  harvest-time  in  the  midst  of  vul- 
gar surroundings,  —  that  she  freely  offers  to  do  in 
Israel.  As  proselyte  she  felt  herself  compelled  to 
what  as  heathen  she  had  never  had  need  of.  Had 
a  sister  Moabitcss  met  her  in  this  employment,  and 
inquired  what  it  was  that  could  urge  her  to  it,  she 
would  have  answered  her  as  Elger  von  Hohenstein 
did  his  brother,  who  finding  him,  away  from  his 
castle  and  its  life  of  ease,  engaged  in  taking  care 
of  the  poor,  exclaimed,  "  Alas,  my  brother,  what 
are  you  doing  ?  what  distress  compels  you  to 
this  ? "  "  Sir  brother  mine,"  was  the  answer, 
"  distress  compels  me  not ;  but  the  love  of  Christ 
my  Lord  constrains  me." 

Here  also  Ruth  is  the  great  type  of  all  true  con- 
version in  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church. 
While  Pharisees  and  priests  were  too  dull  to  recog- 
nize the  light  of  Christ,  the  apostles  whom  he  had 
won  to  himself,  constrained  by  love,  labored  for 
their  nation,  and  were  willing  to  be  banished  and 
to  suffer,  if  only  they  might  win  some.  While  in 
Southern  Europe,  in  the  old  cities  of  the  Roman 
Empire,  the  love  of  Christians  had  become  cold, 
the  new-won  proselytes  from  Celtic,  Anglo-Saxon, 
and  German  heathendom  went  forth,  and  in  the 
heat  of  conflict  and  suffering,  gleaned  rich  harvests 
for  their  Lord  in  the  North  and  East. 

Enough  has  never  been  done  in  the  way  of  seek- 
ing to  win  and  train  converts  by  the  force  of  exam- 

1  But  neither  are  i~12-J   (t"Q2)  and  tS3£  <Ter-  u) 

V  V  -  T  -  T  > 

ooth  of  which  words  occur  only  here  in  Hebrew,  to  be 
referred  to  the  same  radical  signification,  as  has  been  done, 
fce.  g.  by  Fiirst  (in  Lt.x. ),  who  renders  ver.  14  :  'f  and  they 
bound  together  for  ber  parched  ears  of  corn  fin  bundles) :  " 
ind  declares  the  meaning  "  to  reach  out,"  after  the  Targ. 

t^ECIS,  to  be  merely  conjectural.  —  Ttt.]     The  one  comes 


pie  and  doctrine.  Of  example,  indeed,  they  hav« 
often  seen  too  much.  Everything  that  has  ever 
been  done  for  them,  and  which  is  sometimes  made 
matter  of  disguised  boasting,  is  not  equal  to  what 
a  single  proselyte,  burning  with  love  for  the  king- 
dom of  his  Lord,  has  suffered  and  accomplished. 

Starke  :  "  To  begin  a  good  work  is  glorious  ; 
but  to  continue  in  it,  notwithstanding  all  induce- 
ments to  apostasy,  is  godly." 

True  love  can  never  fail  in  its  purpose,  although 
success  may  tarry  long.  Ruth  had  been  married 
ten  years  in  Moab,  before  she  could  say,  "  Thy 
God  is  my  God."  But  now  only  a  few  harvest- 
days  elapsed,  and  the  favor  of  God,  exerting  itself 
through  a  genuine  Israelite,  overspread  herT  Fail- 
ure always  has  its  ground  in  the  spirit  of  the  pur- 
pose. If  that  spirit  be  love  rooted  in  God,  as  in 
Ruth,  it  will  not  be  disappointed.  Hence,  the 
surest  sign  of  love  is  gentle  and  thankful  patience. 

Cheysostom  :  "  Observe  that  what  happened 
to  Ruth  is  analogous  with  what  happened  to  us. 
For  she  was  a  stranger,  and  had  fallen  into  the 
extremest  distress  ;  but  Boaz,  when  he  saw  her, 
neither  despised  her  poverty,  nor  contemned  the 
lowliness  of  her  family.  So  Christ  took  up  the 
Church,  and  chose  the  stranger,  who  lacked  the 
most  necessary  possessions,  for  his  bride.  But  as 
Ruth  would  never  have  attained  to  such  a  union, 
had  she  not  previously  left  her  parents  and  given 
up  people,  home,  and  kindred,  so  the  Church  also 
does  not  become  dear  and  deserving  in  the  eyes  of 
her  Bridegroom,  until  she  has  left  her  ancestral 
(heathen)  morals  and  customs." 

"  Boaz  came  from  Bethlehem  and  said  unto  the 
reapers,"  etc.  A  true  believer  is  also  the  best  em- 
ployer. He  greets  them,  "  Jehovah  be  with  you  !  " 
They  answer,  "  Jehovah  bless  thee !  "  Living  faith 
in  God  is  the  best  bond  between  master  and  work- 
man, preventing  a  wrongful  use  of  power  on  the  one 
side,  and  presumptuous  insubordination  on  the 
other.  Not  as  if  the  servants  of  Boaz  were  free  from 
the  rude  manners  so  generally  characteristic  of  their 
class ;  but  the  just  demeanor  of  their  master,  refined 
by  humility,  controlled  them.  Where  a  pious  and 
brave  spirit  like  that  of  Boaz  pervades  the  com- 
munity, social  questions  and  crises  do  not  arise. 
For  external  laws  can  never  restrain  the  inward 
cravings  of  the  natural  man.  But  where  the  landed 
proprietor,  in  his  relations  to  his  people,  is  governed 
by  other  principles  than  those  of  self-interest,  and 
cares  also  for  their  moral  and  religious  develop- 
ment ;  where,  further,  the  laborer  understands  that 
an  increase  in  wages  is  not  necessarily  an  increase 
of  peace  and  happiness  ;  where,  in  a  word,  the  con- 
sciousness of  an  omnipresent  God  regulates  the  up- 
rightness and  care  of  the  one,  and  the  honesty  and 
devotion  of  the  other,  there  no  artificial  solutions 
of  conflicts  between  capital  and  labor  will  be  re- 
quired. Boaz  lives  in  God,  and  therefore  knows 
what  duties  of  faith  and  love  sre  obligatory  upon 
him. 

Starke  :  "  If  God  be  with  work-people,  and  if 
they  are  reverently  mindful  of  his  omnipresence, 
they  will  be  preserved  from  idleness  and  unfaithful- 
ness, and  restrained  from  all  sorts  of  frivolous  and 

from  a  root  which  means  (t  to  give,"  the  other  from  one 
which  means  K  to  take."  The  first  is  cognate  with  th« 
Arabic  dhabalha,  to  take,  to  lay  hold  of  with  the  hand 
hence  a  "  handfull,"  manipulus  (cf.  11.  xi.  69).  The  other 
is  to  be  compared  with  the  Greek  Sait-avn,  expense,  "  out- 
give,"  cf.  6i'6wjui,  Sanskrit  dadamiy  dare. 

2  [And  necessary,  too,  if  we  follow  the  Masoretic  accentu- 
ation, according  to  which  Boaz  himself  calls  Ruth  at  meal 
time:  "  Come  hit  ber."     Cf.  ncte  under  the  text.  —  Ta.] 


CHAPTER  H.   18-23. 


33 


offensive  babble ;  and  such  labor  draws  after  it  God's 
especial  blessing." 

"  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  give  thee  a  com- 
plete reward."  Boaz  finds  that  Ruth  has  come  to 
glean  on  his  field.  He  had  not  yet  seen,  but  had 
heard  of  her.  But  now,  seeing  her  diligence,  but 
also  her  neediness,  he  yet  does  not  speak  to  her  as 
a  rich  man  to  one  on  whom  he  bestows  an  alms, 
nor  as  one  relative  to  another,  but,  before  all  else, 
as  an  Israelite  to  one  who  has  come  to  shelter  her- 
self under  the  wings  of  Israel's  God.  The  Israelit- 
ish  proprietor  speaks  like  a  priest  of  Jehovah.  Be- 
fore all  his  people,  he  blesses  her  in  her  confession 
of  his  God.  He  announces  to  her  prophetically  the 
reward  of  her  love.  And  his  word  was  fulfilled, 
for,  as  a  church-father  expresses  it,  "  every  believer, 
in  spirit  and  in  truth,  is  a  prophet."  Boaz  pre- 
sents a  beautiful  contrast  with  Ruth;  with  him, 
love  comes  of  faith.  The  chief  and  special  reason 
why  he  does  good  to  her,  is,  that  she  is  a  guest  in 
Israel,  a  dove  under  Jehovah's  protection,  —  that 


love  has  made  her  a  believer.  His  religion  has  the 
uppermost  place  in  his  soul.  It  gives  birth  to  his 
works  —  it  makes  him  conscious  of  his  duty  as  an 
Israelite.  It  gives  him  also  that  delicacy  of  percep- 
tion which  enables  him  to  sympathize  with  the  anx- 
iety, lonesomeness,  and  isolation,  which  attend  an 
entrance  into  a  new  land,  among  a  new  people.  Only 
a  genuine  believer  is  truly  discreet.  Refinement  of 
the  heart  springs  only  of  faith.  There  may  be  a 
lack  of  courtly  manners ;  but  the  most  elevated 
style  of  intercourse  with  men,  and  the  truest  polite- 
ness, are  the  natural  outgrowth  of  a  disposition 
permeated  with  the  humility  of  the  gospel  of  truth. 
Starke  :  "  This  also  is  given  to  pious  souls  by 
God,  that  being  devoted  to  him,  he  often  secretly, 
and  even  without  their  becoming  aware  of  it,  im- 
pels them  to  this  or  that  good  action."  The  sash;  : 
"A  meritorious  person  may  well  enough  be  in- 
formed that  his  merits,  or  whatever  there  be  worthy 
of  praise  and  love  about  him,  are  recognized  and 
properly  estimated." 


Verses  18-23. 


The  Beginning  of  the  Blessing. 

18  And  she  took  it  up,  and  went  [came]  into  the  city  :  and  her  mother-in-law  saw  * 
what  she  had  gleaned:  and  she  brought  forth,  and  gave  to  her  that  she  had  reserved 

19  [left  over]  after  she  was  sufficed  [satisfied].  And  her  mother-in-law  said  unto  her, 
Where  hast  thou  gleaned  to-day  ?  and  where  wroughtest 2  thou  ?  blessed  be  he  that 
did  take  knowledge  [friendly  notice]  of  thee.  And  she  shewed  her  mother-in-law  with 
whom  she  had  wrought,  and  said,  The  man's  name  with  whom  I  wrought  to-day 

20  is  Boaz.  And  Naomi  said  unto  her  daughter-in-law,  Blessed  be  he  of  the  Lord 
[Jehovah],  who  hath  not  left  off  his  kindness  to  the  living  and  to  the  dead.8  And 
Naomi  said  unto  her,  The  man  is  near  of  kin  [related,  lit  near,  i. «.  near,  not  in  comparison 
with  other  relatives,  but  with  men  in  general]  unto  us,  one  of  our  next  kinsmen  [one  of  our 

21  redeemers].     And  Ruth  the  Moabitess  said,  He  said  unto  me  also,4  Thou  shalt  keep 

22  fast  by  my  young  men  [by  my  people],  until  they  have  ended  all  my  harvest.  And 
Naomi  said  unto  Ruth  her  daughter-in-law.  It  is  good,  my  daughter,  that  thou  go  out 

23  [only]  with  his  maidens,  that  they  meet  [maltreat]  thee  not  in  any  other  field.  So 
she  kept  fast  by  the  maidens  of  Boaz  to  glean  unto  the  end  of  barley-harvest  and  of 
wheat-harvest ;  and  dwelt  [and  then  she  abode,  remained]  with  her  mother-in-law. 

TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

p  Ver.  18.  —  Pinion  S^ril :  Wright  points  the  first  word  aa  Hlph.,  N"lpn,  "  and  she  showed."  "  So  we 
prefer  to  read,  following  the  Vulg.,  Syr.,  and  Arab.  It  is  rather  harsh  with  the  ordinary  punctuation  to  make  njHQn 
the  nom.  to  S^J7!]  (so  pointed  by  the  majority  of  MS3.),  when  Ruth  is  the  subject  of  all  the  verbs  that  precede  and 
of  those  that  follow  immediately  after.  Two  of  Kennicott  and  De  Rossi's  MSS.  read  PTnDnVtW,  which  would  seem  to 
Uuply  a  reading  M^i^lT  >  but  while  two  of  my  own  MSS.  have  the  reading  nTH^n-flN,  either  by  first  or  second 

band,  the  verb  is  pointed  as  ordinarily,  K^J-H*       ^Q  aDaence  °f  nW  does  not  prove  that  PTiTlEn  ie  not  an  accufl^ 
rf.  Ges.  117,  2.—  Ta.] 
p  Ver.  19.  —  /Yt£73?  :    used  absolutely  for  "  to  labor,"  as  In  Prov.  xxx.  13  ;  Job  xxili.  9.     Dr.  Cassel  translates : 

a  und  wohej  hast  du  (dtis)  geschaffl,"  i.  e.  "  and  where  (woher,  whence,  freely  for  wo,  where)  didst  thou  procure  (iTtt?^, 
acquire,  make,  cf.  Gen.  xxxi.  1 ;  2  Sam.  xv.  1),  this  ?  "  But,  1,  in  this  sense  the  verb  could  hardly  be  left  without  an 
object ;  and,  2,  the  word  must  have  the  same  sense  here  in  the  question  which  it  has  in  the  answer  in  the  next  clause. 

Wright  prefers  to  render  "  where  hast  thou  stayed,"  i.  e.  spent  the  time,  ^W   being  understood  (cf.  Eccles.  vi   12  and 
the  phrase  iroieTy  \p6vov,  Acts  xv.  33).     But  when  the  talk  is  of  gleaning,  it  is  certainly  more  natural  for  Ruth  to  say, 
'<  the  man  with  whom  (on  whose  fields)  I  worked  to-day  is  Boaz,"  than  "  the  man  with  whom  I  spent  my  time  to-day,1' 
3 


34 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


rtc.  Wright  says  that  "  Gesenius  in  the  Lex.  Man.  prefers  this  rendering."  It  is  not  impossible  that  Gee.  may  hart 
varied  in  different  editions  ;  but  he  has  no  such  preference  in  the  sixth  edit,  of  his  German  HandworterbucA,  nor  in  Robinson1! 

transl.  of  his  Lat.  Lex.  Man.  —  In  H3S,  the  force  of  n  local  is  lost,  as  in  il^HS  —  ^"PS,  nb^b  =  Vb.  —  Te. 

[8  Ver.  20.  —  SVnSrTTlSI   Q,*nnTIS'l  -     "  with  reference  to  the  livinr  and  the  dead."     Accusatives  of  the 

objects  to  which  the  kindness  is  done,  cf.  Ges.  139,  2.     "The  verb   3T3?  is  here  construed  with  a  double  accusative; 

for  if  HN  were  used  as  a  preposition,  it  would  hare  to  be  jHSD  as  we  find  DVQ  in  Gen.  xxiv.  27  "  (Keil).  —  ?0  ^SB 13 

according  to  Ges.  (Lex.  8.  v.  vS3  and  ]J2)  is  a  sg.  noun,  7S3Qj  with  the  plur.  sun",  of  first  person  —  "  our  second 
goel."  But  as  no  such  word  is  found  elsewhere,  and  as  there  is  no  real  difficulty  in  the  way,  the  form  in  the  text  is  to  b» 
taken  as  script,  defect,  for  !Q^  vS3J3,  and  rendered  "  one  of  (on  1T2  in  this  sense,  cf.  Ges.  154,  3,  c)  our  redeemers."  — 
Tb.j 

[4  Ver.  21.  —  D2  ;    not  "even  so,  i.  e.  may  he  be  blessed,  as  you  have  said  "  (Wright),  which  with  the  following 

"for  (^3)  he  said  to  me,"  etc.,  would  make  but  a  mercenary  amen  to  Naomi's  prayer,  to  Bay  nothing  ot  the  fact  that 
by  the  intervention  of  another  clause  the  prayer  is  too  far  away  ;  but,  ct  also  !  "  as  we  say,  t(  more  !  I  have  not  told  you 
all ;  for  he  said,"  etc.,  cf.  Ges.  155,  2,  a.  — On  the  periphrastic  genitives  of  the  verse,  cf.  Ges.  115,  1  Ta.] 


EXEGBTICAL    AND   DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1 8  f.  And  her  mother-in-law  saw  what 
she  had  gleaned.  Naomi  looked  with  astonish- 
ment at  the  large  quantity  brought  home  by  Ruth ; 
and  her  amazement  increased  when  Ruth  in  addi- 
tion produced  and  gave  her  the  remains  of  her  din- 
ner. To  this  astonishment  she  gives  utterance  by 
asking,  "  Where  hast  thou  been '!  in  whose  fields 
canst  thou  have  been  at  work  ?  "  Piety,  however, 
does  more  than  indulge  in  curiosity  simply.  The 
natural  heart  would  have  rejoiced,  received,  en- 
joyed, and  inquired  just  as  Naomi  did,  but  withal 
with  no  thought  except  of  self.  She,  on  the  eon 
trary,  before  her  inquiries  are  answered,  induced 
simply  by  the  abundance  of  the  gifts  and  the  man- 
ifest happiness  of  Ruth,  blesses  the  giver.  For 
this  she  needs  not  to  know  who  he  is.  Whoever 
treated  Ruth  kindly  and  loaded  her  with  presents, 
must  have  designed  to  indicate  his  appreciation  of 
her  lot  and  her  virtues.  He  must  know  what  Ruth 
has  done,  seeing  he  manifested  so  much  solicitude 
for  her,  a  Moabitess.  "  Blessed  be  he  who  has 
taken  special  notice '  of  thee  !  "  It  had  been  a  hard 
thing  for  her  to  send  Ruth  out  for  such  work. 
The  man  who  has  treated  her  dear  child  so  kindly 
that  she  comes  home,  not  only  enriched  with  pres- 
ents, but  also  cheerful  and  happy,  deserves  a  bless- 
ing, and  that  before  she  knows  anything  more. 
This  done,  Ruth  has  opportunity  to  relate  the  par- 
ticulars of  her  good  fortune,  and  finally  gives  the 
name  of  the  man  who  has  befriended  her,  namely, 
Boaz.  She  could  not  know  what  a  consolation 
and  joy  the  utterance  of  this  name  conveyed  to 
Naomi. 

Ver.  20.  Blessed  be  he  of  Jehovah,  who 
hath  not  left  off  his  kindness  to  the  living  and 
to  the  dead.  This  peculiar  exclamation  of  Naomi 
on  hearing  the  name  of  Boaz  is  undoubtedly  worthy 
of  more  careful  attention  than  it  has  hitherto  re- 
ceived. Light  is  thrown  upon  it  by  a  passage  in 
the  history  of  Abraham.  Eliezer  has  come  to 
Aram,  to  procure  a  wife  for  Isaac  from  among 
Abraham's  kindred.  He  is  aware  of  the  great 
importance  which  his  master  attaches  to  his  mis- 
sion. Arrived  at  the  well  outside  of  the  city  of  his 
destination,  he  prays  that  Jehovah  would  so  "  or- 
der" it  (N3VHi?n,  Gen.  xxiv.  12),  that  he  may 
there  meet  with  the  one  appointed  to  answer  the 
wishes  of  his  master.     And,  in  fact,  it  turns  out 

1  ?|T*3J2  :  trjo  iame  word  used  by  Rath  in  expressing 
ker  gratitude  to  Boat  (ver.  10):  ""iVTSnb. 


that  the  atfable  maiden  who  draws  water  for  him- 
self and  his  camels,  is  Rebecca,  the  daughter  of 
Bethuel,  Abraham's  nephew.  The  desired  "  order- 
ing "  has  been  vouchsafed,  and  the  astonished 
Ehezer  exclaims,  "  Blessed  be  Jehovah     .... 

who  hath  not  left  off  his  kindness,"  etc.  (3TO    Sb 

"WpPl,  precisely  the  same  expression  as  in  our 
passage). 

A   similar    providence   has   happened   to   Ruth 

(rHpJS  ~^*\  ver.  3).  Without  knowing  what 
field  to  select,  she  lights  on  that  of  Boaz.  With- 
out knowing  who  he  is,  she  is  favored  by  him. 
Naomi  recognizes  God's  hand  in  this,  even  more 
profoundly  than  Eliezer  did.  It  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  above  (ch.  i.  13,  20,  etc.)  she  has  re- 
peatedly lamented  that  God's  hand  is  against  her, 
that  God  has  inflicted  sorrow  upon  her.  She  has 
indicated  that  in  her  view  this  fate  comes  upon  her 
because  she  —  or  properly  her  husband  and  sons, 
although  she  does  not  say  this  —  went  to  Moab. 
In  the  wonderful  providence  which  made  Ruth  find 
a  friend  in  Boaz,  the  rich  relative  of  her  husband, 
she  feels  herself  justified  to  find  an  indication  that 
God  i=  once  more  gracious  to  her,  and  has  not 
left  off  his  kindness.  If  now  it  was  through  the 
fault  of  her  dear  departed  ones  that  she  had  hith- 
erto experienced  distress,  then  it  also  follows  that, 
since  God's  goodness  again  manifests  itself  so  con- 
spicuously, his  anger  against  those  must  likewise 
be  come  to  an  end.  For  that  reason,  she  speaks 
of  his  kindness  not  only  to  the  living  but  also  to 
the  dead.  For  these  had  died  through  the  same 
sin  which  had  brought  suffering  on  herself.  Hence, 
God's  help  to  her  in  her  suffering,  is  a  manifesta- 
tion of  his  unwearied  grace  toward  both  the  living 
and  the  dead. 

But  it  is  certainly  proper  to  find  a  yet  farther 
meaning  in  these  words.  Independently  of  the 
special  history  of  the  family  of  Elimelech,  this 
utterance  of  Naomi  concerning  God's  kindness  to 
the  living  and  the  dead,  must  have  its  absolute  and 
general  application.  Indeed,  it  must  be  assumed 
that  in  using  it,  Naomi  only  applied  a  generally 
employed  formula  to  her  special  case.  When  one 
says  of  God  that  "  He  does  not  leave  off  his  kind- 

is,"  he  thereby  praises  him  as  the  God  of  par- 
doning love ;  as  the  God  who,  though  He  tarry 
long,  hears  at  last,  and  does  not  leave  the  penitent 
forsaken.  In  this  shorter  form,  the  expression  was 
appropriate  in  the  above-mentioned  passage  from 
Abraham's  history.  For  Eliezer  is  in  perplexity, 
and  knows  not  well  how  to  perform  his  task.    But 


CHAPTER    II.    18-23. 


85 


it  was  especially  appropriate  in  the  mouth  of 
Naomi,  who  had  thought  herself  wholly  forsaken 
of  God.  And  hence,  it  would  seem  natural  to 
think  that  if  the  saying  had  not  already  been  cur- 
rent in  a  fixed  form,  Naomi  would  have  contented 
herself  with  saying,  "  Jehovah  who  hath  not  left 
ofl"  his  kindness  toward  us,"  or  "  toward  the  wid- 
owed and  the  poor,"  etc.  The  kindness  of  God 
"  toward  the  living  and  the  dead,"  is  the  most  gen- 
eral form  of  which  the  saying  is  susceptible.  Now, 
that  God  does  not  leave  off  his  kindness  toward 
the  living,  is  evident  to  believers  from  the  history 
of  every  individual  human  being,  of  Israel,  and  of 
the  world  in  general  (Ps.  liii.  4).  The  very  exist- 
ence of  the  world  testifies  of  mercy  that  never 
ceases,  of  love  that  is  never  embittered.  But 
wherein  is  his  "  kindness  toward  the  dead  "  mani- 
fested? If  these  words  do  not  presuppose  the 
immortality  of  the  soul,  as  an  article  of  Israelitish 
faith,  what  meaning  can  they  have  1  Although 
Naomi,  reassured  by  the  benevolent  actions  of 
Boaz,  may  regain  confidence  in  God's  mercy 
toward  herself,  she  surely  cannot  speak  of  them 
as  kindness  to  the  dead,  if  the  dead  have  no  longer 
auy  being.  In  that  case,  the  actions  of  Boaz, 
however  viewed,  are  and  continue  to  be  kindness 
to  the  living  only.  God  could  indeed  release  the 
living  from  the  consequences  of  the  guilt  of  the 
dead  ;  but  when  in  one  and  the  same  mercy  He  is 
said  to  show  kindness  to  the  latter  as  well  as  to  the 
former,  this  can  have  its  ground  only  in  the  pre- 
supposition that  the  grave  ends  but  this  earthly 
state  of  existence.  Bertheau  and  Keil  both  ex- 
plain, in  the  same  words,  that  God,  "  by  his  care 
for  the  widows,  showed  himself  merciful  to  the 
husband  and  sons  even  after  their  death."  But 
how  can  mercy  be  shown  to  such  as  exist  no 
longer  ?  It  would  never  occur  to  any  one  to  speak 
or  think  of  that  as  a  mercy  to  the  dead,  which,  in 
whatever  light  it  be  put,  is  just  mercy  to  the  living, 
and  nothing  more.  No ;  we  have  in  this  exclama- 
tion of  Naomi  a  significant  indication  of  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  immortality  of  the  soul  which 
existed  in  Israel.  It  had  its  natural  basis  in  that 
very  mercy  of  God  which  does  not  cease.  In  this 
mercy  the  history  of  Israel  in  the  world  and  in  the 
domain  of  the  spirit  originated  and  lives.  The 
Sadducaic  doctrine  was  raised  on  no  other  founda- 
tion thau  an  Epicurean  negation  of  history.  On 
the  enduring  mercy  of  God  toward  the  living  and 
the  dead,  rests  our  Saviour's  great  answer  (Matth. 
xxii.  32)  :  "  God  is  not  a  God  of  the  dead,  but  of 
the  living." 

Ver.  21  f.  The  man  is  related  to  us.  Naomi, 
observing  the  astonishment  of  Ruth  at  her  exclama- 
tion, explains  the  reason  of  it.     (The  "  redeemer," 

7S"I2  will  be  treated  of  farther  on.)  That  Ruth 
had  been  directed  to  the  field  of  a  blood-relative, 
seemed  to  her  a  sufficiently  great  mercy.  For  from 
all  that  Ruth  had  told  her,  it  was  evident  that  she 
was  there  well  and  securely  situated.  The  fear 
lest  Ruth  might  meet  with  rude  treatment  in  the 
narvest-fields,  must  have  been  one  of  Naomi's  chief 
anxieties.  Ruth,  having  learned  who  Boaz  is,  now 
adds,  as  if  she  now  understood  the  reason  of  it, 
ivhat  rs  not  expressly  brought  out  in  the  foregoing 
conversation,  namely,  that   Boaz   had   given   her 

1  [In  the  Pentateuch  "13?3  ^  u^i  in  every  instance 
ixcept  one  (Deut.  xxii.  19),  where  the  later  language  would 
vrite  rt"1372,  cf-  SVT  for  S^H.  Qesenins  and  Fiirst 
lake  the  plural  here  in  the  same  way,  as  used  for  the  femi- 
nine *,  but  both  Boaz  (ver.  3)  and  Naomi  (ver.  22)  use  the 


permission  to  keep  with  his  people  (Q"1^^??)  during 
the  whole  harvest-season.  And  it  testifies  again 
of  the  loving  solicitude  with  which  Naomi,  like  i 
tender  mother,  thinks  for  Ruth,  that,  as  soon  as 
she  hears  the  latter  repeat  the  words  of  Boaz  about 

keeping  with  his  D',~]3}3  (people,  masc.1),  she  at 
once  rejoins  :  "  Good,  my  daughter,  go  with  his 

maidens  OVJin???)?  tnat  tney  injure  thee  not  in 
any  other  field."  She  has  in  all  this  as  yet  no 
other  thoughts  than  those  of  joy  and  gratitude 
toward  God,  that  He  has  so  ordered  it  as  to  direct 
Ruth  to  a  relative  on  whose  estate  she  can  glean 
safely  and  profitably  through  the  entire  harvest, 
and  thus  provide  the  sustenance  of  both  for  a  whole 
year.  The  great  question,  how  to  live,  was  by  this 
providential  intervention  answered.  The  fear  of 
want  was  dissipated  and  that  without  insult  01 
shame.  While  all  other  means  of  help  failed 
Naomi,  she  was  first  comforted  by  the  love  of  her 
daughter-in-law,  then  upheld  by  her  self-sacrifice, 
and  finally  saved  from  want  by  the  fame  of  he» 
virtues.  Amid  the  sorrows  that  befell  her  in  Moab, 
Naomi,  as  she  herself  acknowledged,  was  not  alto- 
gether free  from  blame,  for  she  too  had  gone  thither ; 
only  Ruth  of  all  the  family  had  nothing  to  repent 
of;  and  it  was  through  her  that  God  now  showed 
that  He  had  not  left  off  his  kindness  to  the  living 
and  the  dead. 

Ver.  23.  So  she  kept  fast  by  the  maidens  of 
Boaz  unto  the  end  of  the  harvest.  It  is  mani- 
festly not  without  design  that  it  is  added  concern- 
ing Ruth,  that  she  continued  with  the  maidens 
throughout  the  harvest-season.  Her  diligence  did 
not  relax  from  what  it  was  the  first  day,  although 
she  now  knew  more  than  then.  Her  demeanor  was 
modest  and  unassuming  as  ever,  so  that  she  re- 
turned to  the  field  not  otherwise  than  as  she  had 
left  it.  Her  eyes  were  on  the  field ;  and  to  pro- 
vide for  her  mother-in-law  continued  to  be  her  only 
solicitude.  Boaz  had  opportunity  enough  to  ob- 
serve this.  He  daily  saw  her  gentle  and  virtuous 
conduct.  Externally  and  internally,  she  was  no 
longer  a  stranger  to  him.  He  doubtless  found 
opportunities  to  show  her  favors.  After  an  ac- 
quaintance so  long  and  hearty,  the  narrative  of 
chap.  iii.  is  happily  introduced. 

HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

["  Blessed  be  he  that  took  kindly  notice  of  thee." 
Fuller:  "Learn we  from  hence,  upon  the  sight 
of  a  good  deed,  to  bless  the  doer  thereof,  though 
by  name  unknown  unto  us.  And  let  us  take  heed 
that  we  do  not  recant  and  recall  our  prayers,  after 
that  we  come  to  the  knowledge  of  his  name ;  as 
some  do,  who,  when  they  see  a  laudable  work, 
willingly  commend  the  doer  of  it;  but  after 
they  come  to  know  the  author's  name  (especially 
if  they  be  prepossessed  with  a  private  spleen  against 
him),  they  fall  then  to  derogate  and  detract  from 
the  action,  quarrelling  with  it  as  done  out  of  osten- 
tation, or  some  other  sinister  end." 

Bp.  Hall  :  "  If  the  rich  can  exchange  their 
alms  with  the  poor  for  blessings,  they  have  no  cause 
to  complain  of  an  ill  bargain." 

fern,  form,  which  seems  to  show  that  at  that  time  the  dis 
tinctioD  of  gender  was  no  longer  neglected.       D"H37?    b 
here,  as  in  Job  i.  19,  to  be  taken  as  inolnding  both  se'xes 
there  in  the  sense  '.(  "  young  people,"  here  in  that  of  "  ser 
vents."  —  Te.) 


36 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


"Kindness  to  the  dead."  The  following  re- 
marks, though  based  on  an  interpretation  which 
Dr.  Cassel  decidedly,  and  in  so  far  as  it  assumes  to 
be  exhaustive,  probably  justly  rejects,  may  never- 
theless suggest  a  very  true  and  useful  line  of 
thought.  Its  entire  exclusion  by  our  author  is 
certainly  an  error.  Nothing  is  more  natural  or 
universal  than  the  feeling  that  kindness  done  to 
those  left  behind  by  the  dead  is  kindness  done  to 
the  dead  themselves;  but  it  may  well  be  asked 
whether  this  feeling  is  rooted  in  anything  else  than 
the  conviction,  natural  and  instinctive,  or  other- 
wise, of  the  continued  existence  of  the  son!  after 


death.  Fttlleb  :  "  To  the  dead.  Art  thou,  then, 
a  widower,  who  desirest  to  do  mercy  to  thy  dead 
wife ;  or  a  widow,  to  thy  dead  husband ;  or  a  child, 
to  thy  deceased  parent !  I  will  tell  thee  how  than 
mayest  express  thyself  courteous.  Hath  thy  wife, 
thy  husband,  or  thy  parent,  any  brother,  or  kins- 
man, or  friends  surviving  3  Be  courteous  to  them ; 
and,  in  so  doing,  thy  favors  shall  redound  to  the 
dead.  Though  old  Barzillai  be  uncapable  of  thy 
favors,  let  young  Chimham  taste  of  thy  kindness. 
Though  the  dead  cannot,  need  not  have  thy  mercy, 
yet  may  they  receive  thy  kindness  by  aproxy,  — 
by  their  friends  that  still  are  living." —  Tb.] 


CHAPTER    THIRD. 


Verses  1-6. 


Obedience  in  Innocence. 

1  Then  [And]  Naomi  her  mother-in-law  said  unto  her,  My  daughter,  shall  I  not  seek 

2  rest  [a  resting-place]  for  thee,  that  it  may  he  well  with  thee?  And  now  U  not 
Boaz  of  our  kindred  [  lit.  our  acquaintance,  i.  e.  relative],  with  whose  maidens  thou 

3  wa<t5  Behold,  he  winnoweth  barley  to-night  in  the  threshing  floor.  Wash  thyself 
therefore,  and  anoint  thee,  and  put1  thy  [best]  raiment  upon  thee,  and  get  thee 
down  to  the  floor  :  but  make  not  thyself  known  unto  [suffer  not  thyself  to  be  per- 

4  ceived  by]  the  man,  until  he  shall  have  done  eating  and  drinking.  And  it  shall 
be  when  he  lieth  down,  that  thou  shalt  mark  the  place  where  he  shall  he,  and  thou 
shalt  go  in,  and  uncover  [the  place  at]  his  feet,  and  lay  thee  down ;  and  he  will  tell 

5  thee  what  thou  shalt  do.     And  she  said  unto  her,  All  that  thou  sayest  unto  me  "I 

6  will  do.  And  she  went  down  unto  the  floor,  and  did  according  to  all  that  her  moth- 
er-in-law  bade  her. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[i  Ver.  3.  -On  Vlpfcl  and  "•nTJ1'!,  <*  0»  59, 1,  c  They  are  older  form*  of  the  eecond  per.  K  an4 
there  is  no  occasion  to'  substftnte  the'keVi"  for  them.    Another  Instance  occurs  in  ver.  4.  — Ta.] 

,,  Ter  6  _  "ibS  supplied  by  the  Masorites,  is  unnecessary,  of.  ver.  11  (where,  however,  Wright  also  inserts  it  on 
the  authority  of  versions  and  some  MSS.).  The  same  remark  isapplicable  to  the  case  in  ver.  17.  SoBertheau  and  KeU. 
Dr.  Cassel  omits  it  here,  but  retains  it  in  ver.  17.  —  Ta.) 

"  resting-place  "  in  the  house  of  a  husband.  With 
regard  to  woman,  marriage  was  viewed  as  the  nat- 
ural fulfillment  of  her  calling,  without  which  her 
life  was  helpless  and  defenseless,  as  that  of  a  peo- 
ple without  a  God.  Hence  the  prayer  _  of  Naomi; 
when  about  to  part  from  her  daughters-in-law,  that 
they  may  find  "  rest "  in  the  house  of  a  husband. 
Orpah  returns  because  she  fears  never  to  find  it  in 
Israel.  Ruth  goes  with  her,  because  she  places  her 
love  for  Naomi  above  all  other  considerations. 
Then,  indeed,  the  hearts  of  them  all  were  filled 
with  sorrow.  But  since  then  God's  mercy  has 
again  become  manifest.  New  hope  has  dawned 
upon  their  tears.  What  a  beautiful  and  happy 
contrast  presents  itself  now !  The  same  mother- 
in-law  who  formerly,  in  her  self-forgetfulness,  bade 
her  daughters-in-law  return  to  Moab  and  find  rest- 
ing-places for  themselves,  is  now  in  a  position, 
self-forgetful  as  ever,  to  seek  for  Ruth  the  Moab- 
itess  a  place  in  Israel,  where  it  may  be  well  with 
her.    And  what  was  the  force  that  brought  about 


EXEGETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1.  Shall  I  not  seek  a  resting-place  for 
thee  ?  The  peculiar  proceeding  which  these  words 
introduce,  may  appear  somewhat  surprising  when 
viewed  from  the  standpoint  of  modern  social  life 
and  relations.  At  all  events,  this  explains  why  its 
psychological  significance  has  not  yet  been  prop- 
erly appreciated.  But  the  narrative  of  the  for- 
tunes of  Ruth  is  so  deeply  embedded  in  the  char- 
acteristic life  of  Israel,  that  in  order  to  appreciate 
its  full  beauty,  it  is  indispensable  to  enter  thor- 
oughly into  the  spirit  of  that  life.  Perhaps  no 
history  teaches  more  clearly  than  this,  that  when 
love  and  trust,  in  their  childlike  and  therefore  di- 
vine strength,  first  suffer  and  then  conquer,  there 
is  a  presentation  in  actual  history  of  that  which 
the  highest  works  of  the  imagination  present  only 
in  idea. 

That  which  made  the  fate  of  the  daughter  of 
Jephtbab.  sc   lad,    was  that  she  never  found  a 


CHAPTER   III.    1-6. 


31 


this  beautiful  revolution  !  The  love  of  Ruth  which  | 
?eeks  not  her  own,  the  faithfulness  of  Naomi  which  | 
deserved  such  love. 

The  understanding  of  what  chap.  iii.  relates  will 
be  chiefly  facilitated  by  a  comparison  with  the 
beginning  of  chap.  ii.  While  the  women  are  in 
distress,  it  is  Ruth  who  takes  the  initiative ;  now, 
when  hope  grows  large,  it  is  Naomi.  When  hard- 
ship was  to  be  endured,  the  mother  submitted  her 
will  to  the  daughter,  —  for  Ruth  was  not  sent  to 
glean,  she  went  of  her  own  accord ;  now,  when  the 
endeavor  is  to  secure  the  joy  and  happiness  held 
out  in  prospect,  the  daughter  yields  in  all  things 
to  the  direction  of  the  mother.  The  thought  of 
labor  for  the  mother  originates  with  the  daughter ; 
but  it  is  the  mother  who  forms  plans  of  happiness 
for  the  daughter.  On  both  occasions,  Ruth  under- 
takes a  mission.  The  first  time  she  sets  out,  a 
stranger,  without  a  definite  place  in  view,  and 
dressed  in  the  garb  of  toil  and  mourning;  the 
second  time,  with  a  definite  plan,  encouraged  by 
the  former  success,  and  decked  in  holiday  attire. 
And  yet  the  second  undertaking  was  not  less  hard 
than  the  first.  Humiliation  which  she  had  to  fear 
on  the  first,  might  also  befall  her  on  the  second. 
Indeed,  anything  that  might  have  befallen  her  on 
her  first  expedition,  had  not  God  ordered  her  go- 
ings, would  have  been  far  less  wounding  to  her, 
the  foreign  and  needy  woman,  than  that  which  on 
this  second  expedition  might  pierce  her  sensitive 
heart.  The  first  undertaking  was  more  sorrowful, 
the  second  more  delicate.  At  the  first  she  could 
act  openly,  at  the  second  only  secretly.  Then  the 
worst  risk  she  ran  was  to  suffer  hunger,  now  her 
honor  is  at  stake.  The  faithfulness  to  Naomi 
which  she  then  showed  was  not  greater  than  the 
obedience  which  she  now  manifests. 

And  yet  Naomi  is  as  little  to  be  reproached  for 
sending  Ruth  on  this  second  mission,  as  she  was 
for  accepting  her  proposal  to  go  on  the  first.  On 
the  contrary,  her  course  rather  shows  that  she  did 
not  bear  her  name,  or  had  won  such  love  among 
strangers,  for  nothing. 

Neither  journey  of  Ruth,  taken  with  the  appro- 
bation of  Naomi,  can  be  measured  by  modern 
measuring-rules.  They  are  not  attempts  at  specu- 
lative adventure.  In  both  cases,  what  was  done 
was  in  accordance  with  unimpeachable  rights  af- 
forded by  Israelitish  law  and  custom. 

When  Ruth  went  to  the  field  to  glean,  she  only 
asked  a  right  guaranteed  to  the  widowed  and  the 
poor.  To  deny  her  the  privilege  of  gleaning  would 
have  been  to  deprive  her  of  her  right;  to  injure  or 
put  her  to  shame  in  the  exercise  of  it,  would  have 
been  to  diminish  it.  True,  the  liberal  treatment 
she  received  from  Boaz  was  no  longer  a  right  to  be 
claimed,  but  the  expression  of  good-will  and  kind- 
ness. Naomi  recognized  in  this  the  providential 
arrangement  of  God.  And  it  is  precisely  this  also 
that  gives  courage  to  Ruth  to  claim  for  herself  and 
for  Naomi  the  second  right  to  which  she  is  enti- 
tled. 

It  was  an  ancient  law  in  Israel,  sanctioned  by 
jhe  Mosaic  legislation  (Deut.  xxv.  5),  that  when  a 
man  died  without  issue,  his  brother  was  bound  to 

1  The  sensual  abuse  into  which  the  practice  of  levirate 
marriage  is  said  to  have  fallen  among  the  Nairs  of  Malabar, 
has  extinguished  the  family  proper  among  them.  All  are 
blood-relatives.  They  are  a  tree  without  branches.  The 
correction  of  many  of  the  views  of  Bohlen,  cdtes  lndien,  ii. 
142,  however  much  they  need  it,  cannot  here  be  under- 
taken. 

3  Kiirst  (Concordinlia,  fl.  T.   7H2)  has  truly  remarked 


marry  his  widow.  This  is  a  right  of  the  woman. 
She  can  demand  it  of  him,  and  if  he  refuses,  put 
him  openly  to  shame.  How  early  and  deeply  this 
usage  was  rooted  in  Israel,  may  be  seen  from  Gen 
xxxviii.,  where  the  death  of  Onan  is  ascribed  to 
his  refusal  to  marry  the  widow  Tamar.  The  sig- 
nificance of  this  usage  is  clear.  It  is  also  found 
among  other  nations,  although  distorted  and  ren- 
dered impure.  It  rests  on  the  historical  feeling  of 
the  nations,  which  leads  them  to  attach  importance 
to  the  preservation  not  only  of  the  national  spirit, 
but  also  of  the  national  body,  by  propagation. 
In  the  first  psalm,  the  pious  man  is  compared  with 
a  tree  whose  leaf  never  withers.  And  the  tree  is, 
in  fact,  the  image  best  adapted  to  explain  the  rea- 
son of  the  usage  in  question.  It  is  not  without 
reason  that  the  founder  of  a  people  is  called  its 
stammvater  [stem-father,  trunk-father,  cf.  the  Heb. 

terms  TTOD  and  J~DE?  shoot,  sprout,  branch, 
used  for  "  tribe."  —  Tr.].  United  about  this  com- 
mon trunk,  the  ancient  peoples  distinguished  them- 
selves nationally  (from  nasci)  very  sharply  from 
those  who  were  not  his  offshoots.1  The  different 
families  are  the  branches  of  this  tree.  But  the 
head  of  a  family  is  in  his  turn  a  stem,  putting 
forth  boughs,  as  a  tree  puts  forth  branches. 

The  withering  of  the  tree  is  the  image  of  death. 
As  no  branch  in  the  tree,  so  no  member  in  the 
family,  should  perish.  Now,  the  nation  lives  in  its 
families.  Hence,  if  a  man  dies  without  children, 
it  is  as  if  a  branch  withered  in  the  tree.  To  rem- 
edy this,  a  new  branch  is,  as  it  were,  engrafted  on 
the  tree.  This  is  done  when  the  brother  marries 
the  widow,  and  regards  the  son  she  bears  as  heir  to 
the  name  and  possessions  of  the  deceased  husband. 
But  what  if  there  be  no  brother'?  Is  the  name 
then  to  be  after  all  extinguished  and  the  branch  to 
be  forever  wanting  ?  The  law,  as  given  in  Deut. 
xxv.  5  ff.,  does  not  indeed  declare  it,  but  it  is  an 
inference  in  accordance  with  its  spirit,  that  in  that 
case  the  obligation  passes  over  to  the  nearest  rela- 
tives of  the  deceased.  Every  family  —  such  is  man- 
ifestly the  idea  of  the  usage  —  must  take  care  that 
no  member  in  it  dies  out.  What  the  brother  is  to 
the  brother,  that,  when  he  has  no  brother,  his  more 
distant  blood-relatives  must  be.  The  letter  of  the 
law,  it  is  true,  did  not  command  this ;  but,  as  the 
narrative  of  our  Book  shows,  the  spirit  of  that 
usage  which  the  law  sanctioned,  required  it.  Na- 
omi, by  way  of  explaining  to  her  daughter-in-law 
her  joy  over  the  way  in  which  God  had  ordered 

her  steps,  says,  Boaz  is  related  (3TIJ7,  like  propin- 
quus)  to  us,  he  belongs  to  our  goelim  (7S2).     The 

word  goal  (^N2),  to  which  god  belongs,  is  pbilo- 
logically  and  in  its  original  signification  one  and 
the  same  with  the  Greek  \iu,  "  to  loose."  2  It  is 
not  to  be  ascribed  to  the  same  root  with  the  simi- 
larly sounding  '??|,  although  it  is  true  that,  ow- 
ing to  the  well-known  interchange  of  N  and  i?, 
it  sometimes  occurs  instead  of  it.8  The  latter  word 
means,  "  to  pollute ;  "  and  is  related  to  the  former 

that  7S2   was  lengthened  from  73,  as  I3S7  from  a7, 

-T  T  ~  T  T 

This   v2,  originally  related  to  both  Atiio  and  luo,  has  re- 
tained its  £■,  which  in  the  ancient   languages  has  been  fre- 
quently thrown  off.     The  copious  discussion  of  Benfey,  Gr. 
Gram.  ii.  119-124,  should  be  compared. 
8  The  few  instances,  Isa.  lis.   3,    lxiii.  8,    Zeph.  T.  1, 

Mai  I.  7, 12,  Lam.  iv.  14,  in  which  7N2  —I.  q.  722  written 


4$ 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


%s  the  Latin  luo,  pollute  (cf.  lutum,  poUuo),  to  the  i  also  the  greatest  God  came  not  to  judge  the  world 
Greek  \ia,  "  to  loose."  The  correspondence  of  the 
ideas  "  to  redeem  "  and  "  to  loose,  in  their  exter- 
nal relationship,  testifies,  both  in  Hebrew  and  in 
Iudo-germanic,  to  their  internal  mutual  connec- 
tion.    The  idea  currently  attached  in  Israel  to  the 


term  goal,  "  to  loose,"  is  everywhere  definitely  de- 
termined by   the  conception  of  the  people   as_  an 
historical  organism.     By  this  it  was  defined  mainly 
as  a  "  redeeming  "  [einlosen,  "  inloosing,"  from  ein, 
"  in,"  and  losen,  "  to  loose ; "  i.  e.  a  loosing  of  that 
which  has  been  bound,  by  means  of  which  it  is 
brought  back  into  its  original  position  (e.  g.  a  cap- 
tive into  his  home,   a  slave  into  his  freedom)  or 
ownership  [e.  g.  a  piece  of  land,  a  promissory  note, 
etc.).  —  Tr.]  1    According  to  the  social  philosophy 
of  the  Mosaic  law,  no  member  of  the  national 
organism  was  to  perish,  no  branch  of  the  tree  was 
to  wither.     Whatever  had  been  dislocated  by  nat- 
ural events  was  to  be  re-set;  whatever  had  been 
alienated  must  be  redeemed.     This  applied,  as  an 
example  in  our  Book  itself  teaches,  to  lands  as  well 
as  to  persons ;  and  the  duty  of  redemption  rested, 
as  within  the  nation,  so  within  the  families  into 
which  the  nation  branched  out.    No  one  could 
redeem  anything  for  a  family,  who  did  not  belong 
to  it  by  blood-relationship.     Hence  also  the  transi- 
tion of  the  idea  of  god  into  that  of  blood-relative 
was   perfectly  natural.     Properly  speaking,  there 
could  be  no  redeemer  who  was  not  a  blood-rela- 
tive.    The  meaning  of  the  word  is  profoundly  set 
forth   in  the  various   grand    historical  unfoldings 
of  its  idea.     For  every  redemption   [einlGsung,  "  in- 
loosing,"]  has  always  "been  a  setting  free  [lo'sung, 
"loosing"],  albeit  not  always  without  security. 
The  Greek  \va  also  passes  over  into  the  idea  of 
"  setting  free,"    "  releasing."      Dionysos,  in    his 
character  as  god  of  the  spring-season,  is  called 
Lysios,  the  Liberator.     The  Liberator  of  Israel  is 
God.     He  frees  out  of  and  from  servitude.    For 
that  reason,  the  Messiah  who  delivers  Israel  is 
especially  called  God.    When  he  appears,  he  will 
come   as  Israel's  blood-relation  and  brother,   as 
Christ  was.     The  dismal  counterpart  of  the  god 
as   redeemer   and   deliverer,  is  the  god  as  blood- 
avenger.     He  owes  his  origin  to  the  opinion,  which 
slowly   and  painfully  disappeared  in  Israel,2   but 
which  is  still  partially  prevalent  in  the  East,  and 
inspires  many  current  superstitions,  that  the  blood 
of  the  slain  cannot  be  put  to  rest  and  liberated, 
until  his  murderer  has  been  killed.     The  duty  of 
this  blood-revenge  rests  upon  the  blood-relatives, 
not  only  on  the  brother,  strictly  so  called,  but  on 
the  nearest  relative,  whoever  he  may  be.     So  far 
this  terrible  usage  becomes  instructive  with  refer- 
ence to  the  beneficent  national  custom  which  made 
it  the  duty  of  the  blood-relative  not  to  let  the  house 
of  his  kinsman  die  out ;  for  this  also  was  a  blood- 
redemption,  not  unto  death,   however,  but  unto 
happiness  and  peace.     The  god  was  no  judge  —  as 


but  a  comforter,  a  dispenser  of  life  and  love. 
Ver.  2.     Is  not  Boaz  of  our  kindred?     By 
these  words  Naomi  explains  to  Ruth  the  right  she 
has  to  engage  in  the  undertaking  she  is  about  to 
recommend.     His  relationship  gives  her  a  right  to 
apply  to  him  for  a  performance  of  its  duties.     It  is 
not  to  be  thought  singular  that,  if  Ruth  had  this 
right  of  marriage,  the  first  motion  toward  its  ful- 
fillment did  not  come  from  Boaz.    In  the  first 
place,  it  was  in  accordance  with  ancient  usage  to 
leave  the  assertion  of  a  right  with  its  possessoi 
It  was  not  the  duty  of  a  landowner,  for  example, 
to  go  after  the  poor,  and  make  them  glean ;  but  it 
was  bis  duty  not  to  forbid  them,  when  they  came. 
In  the  next  place,  however,  we  learn  farther  on 
that  Boaz  was  not  the  nearest  relative.     The  ob- 
jection which  Ruth  in  her  humility  might  find  in 
her  Moabitish  nationality,  or  which  she  might  en- 
tertain even  without  reference  to  that  fact,  is  met 
by  Naomi  in   the  words :  "  with  whose  maidens 
thou  wast."     She  thus  reminds  Ruth  that  Boaz,  so 
far  from  slighting  her  on  account  of  her  nation- 
ality, has  distinguished  her,  and  put  her  on  perfect 
equality  with  his  Israelitish  work-people. 

Behold,  he  winnoweth.  barley  to-night  in  the 
threshing-floor.3  This  remark  shows  that  since 
Ruth's  participation  in  the  harvest  of  Boaz,  Naomi 
must  have  come  into  closer  connection  with  her 
relative.  She  is  minutely  informed  of  what  he 
does  and  where  he  is.  We  must  also  suppose  that 
it  had  not  escaped  her  how  much  kindness  Boaz 
had  shown  to  Ruth.  She  could  not  but  feel  sure 
that  the  claim  which  Ruth  was  to  prefer,  would 
not  be  addressed  to  a  hard  and  unsympathetic 
heart.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  natural  to  think 
that  although  Boaz  was  an  elderly  man,  Ruth 
must  be  heartily  attached  to  him.  It  was  he,  whose 
kindliness  fell  like  a  first  beam  of  light  on  her  sad- 
ness. Such  an  impression,  after  scenes  and  moods 
like  those  through  which  Ruth  had  passed,  is  never 
lost.  She  went  forth  on  her  first  undertaking  at 
the  beginning  of  barley-harvest ;  she  enters  on  the 
second,  when  the  barley  is  winnowed  on  the  thresh- 
ing-floor. Between  the  two  there  lies  an  interval 
of  time  sufficient  to  explain  how  Naomi  could  have 
the  courage  and  the  information  necessary  to  send 
her  daughter  on  such  an  errand. 

Ver.  3  ff.  But  let  not  thyself  be  perceived 
by  the  man.  Ruth  was  directed  to  pay  special 
attention  to  the  adornment  of  her  person,  to  which, 
to  this  extent  at  least,  she  had  since  the  death  of 
her  husband  been  a  stranger.  She  is  to  lay  aside 
the  weeds  of  mourning  and  the  garments  of  toil, 
and  after  bathing  and  anointing,  don  the  festive 
garb ;  for  the  expedition  on  which  she  goes  is  of  a 
joyous,  bridal  nature.  All  this,  however,  is  not 
done  in  order  to  win  Boaz  by  external  beauty  ;  for 
she  is  specially  cautioned  against  allowing  him  to 
see  her  by  day.    Bnt  why  this  caution  1    Boaz  was 


.vith  an  S  —  occurs  in  the  sense  "  to  pollute,"  should  not 
have  been  placed  under  vS3,  "to  loose,"  in  the  concordance 
(cf.  Furst].  No  one  would  identify  luo  (poUuo)  with  Xvu  in 
that  way. 

1  Our  losen,  "  to  loose,"  also,  has  in  M.  H.  Germ,  the 
sense  of  eintiisen,  "  to  redeem,"  "  to  ransom,"  sc.  a  pledge, 
land.  etc.  It  occurs  in  this  sense  in  poets  and  documents, 
HpecUUy  Low   German,   cf.    Riedel,    Cod.  Brand,  i.  2,  207  : 

'  van  dtn  droszlen  dat  land  losete."  In  another  document 
llerr  Hetnrich  von   Mecklenburg  Is  to  "  ledegen    und  losen 

\iinlijsen)  alle  hits  und  stede  und  de   land;"  cf.  Krocher, 

Vrlcundcnbuth  zur    Gesch.  da  Qcschlechts,  1.  172;  also,  1. 

IB,  etc. 


2  My  observations  in  my  treatise  on  B  den  armen  Hein~ 
rich,"  will  hereafter,  D.  V.,  be  further  elaborated.  Cf.  the 
article  of  J.  G.  Hoffmann  on  Blulracke,  in  the  HalliscJun 
Encykl. 

8  [Winnowing  is  done  by  tossing  the  mingled  grain  and 
chaff  up  into  the  air,  when  the  chaff  is  blown  away  to 
a  distance,  while  the  heavier  grain  fells  straight  down. 
Hence,  the  evening  and  early  night  when  a  cool  wind  fre 
quently  arises  after  hot,  sultry  days  (cf.  Gen.  iii.  8),  was 
taken  advantage  of  by  Boaz  for  this  work.  For  "  to-night," 
the  Targum  has,  « in  the  night  wind."  On  threshing  and 
threshing-floors,  cf.  Bob.  1.  660 ;  Thomson,  U.  814  ff.  - 
Tb] 


CHAPTER  in.   7-18. 


89 


a  believing  Israelite,  and  therefore  also  a  man  of 
strict  morals.  It  would  have  perplexed  and  dis- 
pleased him  to  think  that  anybody  else  had  seen 
Ruth,  and  might  suspect  both  her  and  himself  of 
an  illicit  meeting  on  the  solitary  threshing-floor. 
He  would  have  scarcely  listened  to  her,  but  re- 
moved her  at  once.  The  purpose  for  which  she 
came  had  also  an  appropriate  symbolism,  which 
any  previous  meeting  would  have  disturbed.  By 
whatever  means,  Naomi  knew  that  this  night  — 
for  it  was  in  the  night  that  Ruth  was  to  present 
her  petition  —  Boaz  was  to  be  alone  on  the  thresh- 
ing-floor. The  floor,  albeit  not  entirely  closed  in, 
may  have  been  partially  surrounded  by  some  sort 
of  fencing,  by  means  of  which  Ruth  could  conceal 
herself  until  the  proper  time,  and  within  which 
Boaz  ate  and  drank.  Mo.-t  probably  the  grain- 
heaps  themselves  formed  the  natural  boundaries, 
Detween  which,  accordingly,  Boaz  also  betook  him- 
self to  repose. 

Ver.  6.  And  did  according  to  all  that  her 
mother-in-law  bade  her.  Ruth  was  to  do  some- 
thing a  little  beyond  what  the  prudence  and  deli- 
cacy of  a  woman  ordinarily  permitted.  For  that 
reason,  it  is  expressly  repeated  that  she  did  as  her 
mother-in-law  directed  her.  She  was  justly  confi- 
dent that  the  latter  would  order  nothing  that 
could  injure  her.  True  love,  such  as  Ruth  cher- 
ished for  Naomi,  always  includes  perfect  obedience. 
It  was  not  in  Ruth  that  the  thought  of  a  new  mar- 
riage had  originated.  Her  heart  had  no  other 
thought  than  to  serve  Naomi  like  a  dutiful  child. 
But  Naomi,  equally  self-forgetful,  busied  herself 
with  plans  for  a  "  resting-place  for  her  child." 
She,  too,  thought  not  of  herself  only,  but  of  Ruth. 
She  had  undoubtedly  done  all  that  was  in  her 
power  by  way  of  preparation,  before  she  directed 
Ruth  to  take  the  decisive  step.  From  that  step 
she  could  not  save  her,  for  custom  devolved  it  on 
her.  It  is  the  beauty  of  the  present  instance,  that 
this  custom  compelled  Ruth  to  nothing  that  was 
against  her  will.  For  although  she  acted  in  a 
matter  regulated  by  law,  it  was  not  settled  in  this 
case  that  Boaz  was  the  right  man.  So  much  the 
more  essential  was  it  that,  by  Ruth's  personal 
action,  the  perfect  freedom  and  inclination  of  the 
woman  should  be  manifested.  The  greater  the 
stress  that  was  laid  on  this  by  the  whole  symboli- 
cal proceeding,  the  more  significant  is  the  remark 
that  Ruth  "  did  everything,  as  her  mother-in-law 
jommanded  her." 


HOHILETICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

"  Go  down  to  the  threshing-Jloor."  Love  speak] 
only  of  duties,  not  of  rights.  Ruth  offered  to  go 
to  the  field  and  glean  ;  but  of  the  right  of  redemp- 
tion which  she  had,  she  said  nothing.  She  thought 
of  the  duties  that  devolve  on  the  poor,  but  not  of 
her  right  to  marriage.  In  going  to  Boaz,  she  man- 
ifested the  obedience  of  love,  the  most  difficult  of 
all  love's  performances.  It  is  much  to  toil  for  a 
loved  one,  to  humble  one's  self,  to  give  up  every- 
thing, and  to  forget  the  past ;  but  the  hardest 
thing-  for  a  woman  is  to  conquer  the  fears  of  femi- 
nine delicacy,  to  quiet  the  apprehensions  of  the 
heart,  and  that  not  by  boldly  transgressing  moral 
law,  but  by  virtue.  Ruth's  visit  to  Boaz  in  the 
night  was  harder  for  her,  than  it  is  for  a  young 
girl  to  leave  home  and  enter  service.  Her  obedi- 
ence in  this  matter  was  the  utmost  sacrifice  she 
could  make.  She  risked  her  womanly  feelings  ; 
and  that  to  a  virtuous  woman  is  more  than  to  risk 
life.  She  claimed  a  right,  to  claim  which  was 
more  painful  than  the  heaviest  duties.  But  her 
self-forgetful  love  pours  an  auroral  glow  of  divine 
purity  over  everything.  Her  love  was  not  the  sen- 
sual love  of  romances.  She  loved  Naomi,  her 
mother  ;  and  in  order  to  procure  honor  and  love 
in  Israel  for  this  mother,  and  to  save  the  name  of 
her  deceased  husband  from  extinction,  she  does 
what  only  a  chaste  woman,  inspired  by  the  obedi- 
ence of  love  dare  do,  and  what  the  polluted  eyes  of 
impure  souls  never  understand.  Vanity  and  self- 
interest  had  found  but  a  slight  trial  in  her  under- 
taking. To  virtue  and  ancient  patriarchal  man- 
ners, the  visit  of  Ruth  to  Boaz  was  the  utmost  of 
womanly  endurance.  It  was  harder  for  Ruth  to 
don  her  best  attire  for  this  purpose,  than  to  go 
about  in  her  working  clothes.  For  virtue  would 
rather  put  on  sackcloth  and  ashes,  than  the  gar- 
ments of  a  joy  which  may  easily  be  misconceived. 
It  is  more  of  a  martyrdom  to  face  the  possibility  of 
appearing  as  a  sinner,  than  to  suffer  punishment 
for  the  sake  of  virtue.  But  the  chaste  love  of  obe- 
dience succeeds  in  everything.  Ruth  conquers, 
and  is  neither  seen  nor  misapprehended.  She  re- 
ceives the  crown  of  love  and  faith. 

Saileb  :  Galleries  of  beautiful  pictures  are  pre- 
cious ;  but  virtuous  young  men  and  maidens  are 
more  precious  than  all  the  picture-galleries  of  the 
world. 

Stakke  :  The  bride  of  Christ  is  pleasing  to  her 
Bridegroom  only  when  anointed  with  the  Spirit 
and  clothed  in  the  garments  of  salvation. 


Vkbses  7-18. 


Innocence  and  Piety. 

7  And  when  Boaz  had  eaten  and  drunk,  and  his  heart  was  merry  [cheerful],  he 
went  to  lie  down  at  the  end  of  the  heap  of  corn  [-sheaves]  :  and  she  came  softly,1 

3  and  uncovered  [the  place  at]  his  feet,  and  laid  her  down.  And  it  came  to  pass  at 
midnight,  that  the  man  was  afraid  [startled],  and  turned  himself  [bent  himself  over] : 

9  and  behold,  a  woman  lay  at  his  feet  And  he  said,  Who  art  thou  ?  And  she  an- 
swered, I  am  Ruth  thine  handmaid :  spread  therefore  thy  skirt  [wings]  9  over  thine 
10  handmaid  ;  for  thou  art  a  near  kinsman  [a  redeemer].  And  he  said,  Blessed  be  thou 
of  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  my  daughter  :  for  thou  hast  shewed  more  kindness  in  the 


40  THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


latter  end  than  at  the  beginning,8  inasmuch  as  thou  followedest  not  [didst  not  gc 

11  after]  young  men,  whether  poor  or  rich.  And  now,  my  daughter,  fear  not ;  I  will 
do  to  thee  all  that  thou  requirest  [sayest]  :  for  all  the  city  [gate]  of  my  people  doth 

12  know  that  thou  art  a  virtuous  [brave]  4  woman.  And  now  it  is  true6  that  I  am  thy 
near  kinsman  [a  redeemer]  :  howbeit  there  is  a  kinsman   [redeemer]  nearer  than  I. 

13  Tarry6  this  [to]  night,  and  it  shall  be  in  the  morning,  that  if  he  will  perform 
unto  thee  the  part  of  a  kinsman  [redeemer ;  lit.  if  he  will  redeem  thee],  well  ;  let 
him  do  the  kinsman's  part  [let  him  redeem] :  but  if  he  will  not  do  the  part  of  a 
kinsman  to  thee  [shall  not  be  inclined  to  redeem  thee],  then  will  I  do  the  part 
of  a  kinsman  to  thee  [then  will  I  redeem  thee],  as  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  liveth: 

14  lie  down  until  the  morning.  And  she  lay  at  his  feet  until  the  morning:  and  she 
rose  up  before'  one  [a   man]    could    know  another  [recognize  his  friend].     And 

15  [For]  he  said,  Let  it  not  be  known  that  a  [the]  woman  came  into  the  floor.  Also 
he  said.  Bring  the  vail  [mantle]  8  that  thou  hast  upon  thee,  and  hold  it.  And  when 
she  held  it,  he  measured  six  measures  of  barley,  and  laid  it  on  her  :  and  she  [he]  • 

16  went  into  the  city.  And  when  [omit:  when]  she  came  to  her  mother-in-law,  [and] 
she  [v.  e.  the  mother-in-law]  said,  Who  art  thou,  my  daughter?  and  she  told  her  all  that 

17  the  man  had  done  to  her.     And  she  said,  These  six  measures  of  barley  gave  he  me  ; 

18  for  he  said  to  me,  Go  not  empty  unto  thy  mother-in  law.  Then  said  she,  Sit  still 
[Remain  quiet],  my  daughter,  until  thou  know  how  the  matter  will  fall :  for  the  man 
will  not  be  in  [omit :  be  in]  rest  until  he  have  finished  the  thing  this  day. 

TEXTUAL  AND  GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  7.  —  Tiba  :  not  "secretly"  (Keil),  which  would  be  superfluous  here;  but  as  in  Judg.  It.  21,  "quietly," 
"  softly,"  so  as  not  to  wake  the  sleeper  —  in  a  muffled  manner,  cf.  Lex.  8.  v.  tO5!  7.  —  Te.] 

[2  Ver  9  -  *TC33  must  be  regarded  as  dual,  with  the  suffix  defect,  written  (Qes.  91,  2,  Rem.  1);  for  as  the  wort 
does  not  stand  in  palise,  the  seghol  cannot  be  a  mere  lengthened  sheva  (Ges.  29,  4,  b).  The  Masoretic  tradition,  there- 
fore  understands  "  wings  »  here,  and  not  "  skirt,"  or  «  coverlet,"  in  which  sense  the  word  is  always  used  in  the  singular. 
The' covering  wing  is  a  favorite  emblem  of  protection  in  the  psalms  and  elsewhere,  and  is  here  far  more  beautiful  and  sug- 
gestive than  "  skirt  "  or  "  coverlet,"  even  though  the  translation  of  the  metaphor  into  the  language  of  action  did  carry 
with  it  an  actual  spreading  of  the  skirt  over  one,  cf.  the  commentary.     The  rendering  «  wrogs     is  also  adopted  by  Ber- 

^rVe^lO^Dr'^se"1^.  d.ine  Lube,  die  spatere,  noch  sohSner  gemadU,  at,  die  erste;  or,  as  Dr.  Wordsworth 
very  happily,  as  well  as  literally  renders :  «  thou  hast  bettered  W^n)  thy  Utter  loving  kindness  above  the  former." 
The  comparison  is  not  as  to  quantity,  but  as  to  quality Te.] 

[4  Ver  11  —  Vn  nt^S  '  lit-  "a  woman  of  strength."  Dr.  Cassel  here  renders  it  (with  DeWette)  by  vadera 
Weib  brave  valiant  woman,  while  he  aftorwerds  (see  foot-note  on  p.  43)  substitutes  braves  Weib,  i.  e.  good,  excellent  wo- 
man  fee  also'  Keil).  Others  :  "  capable  woman."  All  these  renderings,  including  that  of  the  E.  V.  (which  Is  not  to  be 
taken  in  the  restricted  sense  of  "chaste,"  but  in  that  of  its  Latin  original),  agree  much  better  than  they  seem  to  do. 
They  are  all  embraced  in  Vl"!,  which  is  here  manifestly  used  of  moral  strength,  cf.  Prov.  xii.  4,  xxxi.  10.  A  morally  strong 
person  is  brave  and  good,  capable  in  the  noblest  sense  ;  in  a  word  virtuous,  possessed  both  of  virtue  and  of  virtues.  -Tr.] 

[6  Ver.  12.  -  "  'S  before  D3DS,  in  order  to  strengthen  the  assurance  :  '  and  now,  truly  indeed,'  cf.  Job  xxxvi.  4. 
Beside  the  Kethibh  DM  T3,  "etave  here,  as  in  2  Sam.  xiii.  33,  xv.  21 ;  Jer.  xxxix.  12,  the  Keri  »3.  After  the  as- 
severating n3t3S  "<3  occurs  in  Job  xii.  2,  as  elsewhere  after  an  oath,  Gen.  Mil.  16  f. ;  2  Kgs.  iii:  14:  but  nS  ^ 
occurs  also  in  'such  a  position,  2  Sam.  xv.  21  (Kethibh) ;  2  Kgs.  v.  20 ;  Jer.  li.  14,  cf.  Ew.  356  b. ;  and  there  is  therefore 
no  ground  for  preferring  the  easier  reading  of  the  Keri,  especially  as  DM  "»S  excludes  from  the  assurance  the  opposite  of 
what  forms  its  object  yet  more  decidedly  than  the  simple  "3,  thus  !  truly,  indeed,  only  a  goel  am  I  =  truly,  I  am  en- 
tainly  a  goel  -I  am  that  and  nothing  else."  (Bertheau.)  Keil  also  thinks  that  the  meaning  of  UN  ^  Is  to  be  ex 
plained  from  its  use  in  the  sense  of  nisi,  cf.  Lex.  — Th.] 

6  Ver.  13.  -  *yb.  The  MSS.  have  here  either  a  large  b  or  a  large  2.  The  Masora  parva  remarks  that  the  Ori- 
ent.-,! (i  e  Babvlonian)  Jews,  especially  preserve  the  large  \  Many  conjectures  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  large  letter 
are  clearly  wide  of  the  mark.  The  ground  of  such  majuscul*  is  undoubtedly  to  be  sought  in  the  purpose  of  ancient  Iran- 
bribers  (as  Le  Olerc  rightly  intimates),  to  direct  the  attention  of  the  reader  to  facts  or  thoughts  which  to  them  appeared 
.specially  noteworthy.     Thus  in  Eccles.  vii.  1,  where  the  first  letter  of  SfoD  »•  a  majuscula.  The  value  of  a  good  nam, 

pressed  itself  here.  So  also  in  Eccles.  xii.  13,  where  the  D  in  *pD  «■  ««t»  ""^  The  Meli,y  °f  """  tran8crit*™; 
onwillinK  to  obliterate  any.  even  subjective  marks,  has  preserved  such  peculiarities.  With  doctrine  or  any  special  exe- 
,„,s,  these  letters  have  nothing  to  do.     Thns,  in  Esth.  i.  6,  the  transcriber,  wishing  to  direct  attention  to  the  splendor 


CHAPTER  in.   7-18. 


41 


»t  the  royal  banquet,  the  description  of  which  begins  with  H^n,  wrote  H  large.  And  eo  In  our  passage,  it  seemed 
mportant  to  the  picus  transcriber  (as  Buxtorf  not  without  reason  indicates),  to  call  the  reader's  attention  to  the  language 
tnd  moral  conduct  of  Boaz. 

7  Ver.  14.  —  Instead  of  the  usual  07^)  we  have  here,  and  only  here,  Dl^tO  in  Kethibh.    The  pointing    D^tD 

waB  occasioned  by  the  endeavor  to  derive  the  word  from  a  specifically  Hebrew  root.  I  hold  the  form  DTITp,  0""ll?t 
to  be  itself  original.  Comparative  philology  satisfactorily  explains  the  word.  It  belongs  to  npCv,  n-pofio?,  primus,  paramo, 
Goth. puma  (as  "117112  belongs  to  punts,  11^  to  paries,  etc.),  and  is  not  at  all  to  be  explained  from  the  Hebrew.  The 
Midrash  (Rulti  Rabba  34  d.)  has  also  noted  the  reading  DTHTO,  and  in  its  usual  way  explains  the  added  1  of  sit 
hours,  which  Ruth  spent  in  the  threshing-floor.  [According  to  Bertbeau  Dl^tp  is  a  later  Aramaic  form  for  the  old, 
genuine  Heb.  D~ltp,  and  is  by  Aram,  analogy  to  be  pronounced  D*Ot9.  Not  likely  ;  as  DVItp  is  not  found  in  Aram. 
Fiirst  derives  it  from  "")tQ  ("l*lt2,  an  unused  root,  meaning  "  to  wait  "J  with  the  termination  DV  —  TV.  Ewald  seem* 

to  regard  OV^  as  a  shortened  (?)  form  of  D"^^,  which  he  derives  from  mtDt  an  unused  root,  meaning  "to  bs 
fresh,'-  cf.  Lehrb.  337  c.  —  Tr.] 

[8  Ver.  15.  —  jnnGtiJSn  ^DH.  ^2H  (milel),  as  it  is  written  in  most  MSS.,  is  the  second  per.  sg.  fem.  imperat.  ot 
D7T,  to  give,  cf.  Qes.  69,  3,  Rem.  2.  The  reading  "OH,  found  in  some  MSS.  is  either  for  S^SH  (t.  e.  the  hiph.  Inf. 
const,  of  K12    used  imperatively,  like  an  infin.  absol.),  or  better  for  ^H^H,  second  fem.  imper.,  cf.  Green,   Gram. 

154,  2.  —  On  the  nnSt^Q,  Wright  quotes  the  following  explanation  from  Schroeder,  De  Vest.  Mul.  Heb. :  c'  Quia  adeo 
ampla  erant  veterum  pallia,  ut  pars  in  humerum  rqiceretur,  altera  brachio  subduceretur,  Rutha,  prehendens  ahquam 
partem  ejus  sinu  oblatas  a  Boaso  fruges  excepit.  Imo  aliam  vestem  quam  pallium,  ne  admittere  quidem  ipse  textus  videtur. 
Nam  ex  verbis  ^V  vV  *^U?W,  da  vestem  qua  est  super  te,  haud  obscure  colligitur,  vestem  intelligendum  esse  totum  cor- 
pus tegentem ;  quoniam  alias  pro  genio  linguae  Hebraeae,  specialius  membrum  corporis  cui  ilia  applicata  fuisset,  expres 
sis  potius  verbis  fuisset  nominatum.  Accedit  quod  aliud  quodcunque  tegumentum,  nonnisi  uni  corporis  parti,  v.  g. 
capiti,  destinctum,  ad  usum,  quern  volebat  Boasus,  fuisset  ineptum.  Neque  insolitum  id  veteribus  fuit,  ut  in  sinu  vesti* 
menti  exterioris  aliquid  deportarent."  —  Te.] 

[9  Ver.  16- — S3S1,  "  and  he  went."  Wright  proposes  to  read  NDJ*11,  "  and  she  went,1' on  the  ground  that  many 
MSS.  have  this  reading,  and  that  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  why  Boaz  should  go  to  the  city  at  so  early  an  hour.  The 
MS.  authority,  however,  loses  all  its  force  when  the  strong  probability  is  considered  that  the  reading  is  only  a  conjectural 
emendation.  Wright's  other  ground  is  by  no  means  decisive.  The  simple  idea  is,  that  Boaz,  after  he  had  dismissed  Ruth, 
also  went  to  the  city,  probably  to  his  house,  whence  afterwards  he  ,f  went  up  "  (77  ;V,  expressive  of  the  reverence  with 
which  the  mind  regards  the  place  of  judgment,  cf.  Deut.  xvii.  8),  to  the  gate,  ch.  iv.  1.  So  Keil ;  but  cf.  Dr.  Cassel  on 
ch.  iv.  1.  —  In.) 


EXEQETICAL  AND  DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  7.  And  Boaz  ate  and  drank,  and  was 
cheerful.  It  illustrates  the  simplicity  of  ancient 
patriarchal  times  and  manners,  that  Boaz,  the 
wealthy  proprietor  of  a  great  estate,  himself  keeps 
watch  on  his  threshing-floor,  works  till  late,  and 
then  betakes  himself  to  rest  in  the  solitude  of  the 
open  field.1  It  is  clear  that  he  did  not  do  this  every 
uay ;  for  the  well-informed  Naomi  says,  "to-night  he 
winnows  barley."  It  is  probable  that  this  night 
he  relieved  his  overseer.  The  remark,  that  "  his 
heart  was  cheerful,"  is  not  added  without  a  reason. 
It  is  not,  however,  intended  to  indicate  that  this 
was  why  Ruth  was  directed  to  present  her  petition 
after  he  had  eaten  and  drunk.  It  is  true,  indeed, 
that  it  was  a  current  and  probably  well-founded 
maxim  among  the  ancients  that  requests  should 
not  be  made  of  great  men  before,  but  after  eating 
(cf.  Esth.  vii.  3),  they  being  then  more  kindly  dis- 
posed. But  Ruth  made  no  use  of  this  post-prandial 
benevolence,  for  she  allowed  Boaz  to  betake  him- 
self to  rest  before  she  approached  him.  These 
words  are  rather  designed  to  point  out  the  danger 
encountered  by  Ruth  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
virtue  of  Boaz  on  the  other. 

1  [The  same  practice  is  still  continued  in  Palestine,  cf. 
Rob.  ii.  83 ;  Thomson,  ii.  611  Its  design  is,  of  course,  to 
Keep  the  grain  from  being  stolen.  Thomson  says,  that  "  it 
•s  not  unusual  for  husband,  wife,  and  all  the  family  to  en- 
mmp  at  the  threshing-floors,  and  remain  until  the  harvest 
•  over."—  Tb.] 


Ver.  8.  And  it  came  to  pass  at  midnight, 
etc.  Boaz  had  laid  himself  down  ;  it  had  become 
dark.  Thereupon  Ruth  had  come,  and  had  laid 
herself  softly  down  at  his  feet,  drawing  over  her- 
self a  part  of  the  cover  under  which  he  lay.  The 
simple  narrative  paints  most  beautifully.  It 
was  midnight,  when,  perhaps,  by  a  movement  of 
his  foot,  bringing  it  in  contact  with  the  person  of 
Ruth,  he  was  startled  out  of  his  sleep.  He  bends 
himself  forward2  in  order  to  see  what  it  is  he 
touches,  and  lo,  a  woman  lies  at  his  feet!  He 
says,  Who  art  thou  ?  and  she  answers  : 

Ver.  9.  I  am  Ruth  thine  handmaid ;  spread 
thy  wings  over  thy  handmaid,  for  thou  art  a 
redeemer.  Ruth  had  been  sent  to  demand  the 
fulfillment  of  an  ancient  right.  This  right,  pecu- 
liar as  it  was,  had  its  symbol,  under  which  it  was 
claimed.  We  are  made  acquainted  with  it  by  the 
words  addressed  by  Ruth  to  Boaz,  and  by  her  ac- 
tion in  drawing  an  end  of  his  coverlet  over  herself. 
The  words  are  not  contained  in  the  instructions  of 
Naomi  to  Ruth,  as  to  what  she  is  to  do ;  but  the 
action  taught  her,  necessarily  presupposes  them. 
Marriage  is  a  resting-place.  The  wife  finds  rest 
under  the  protection  of  her  husband,  as  Israel  finds 
it  under  the    overshadowing  wing  of  Jehovah. 

2  Dp  v*1,  as  it  is  said  of  Sampson,  Juig.  xrt.  29,  that 
he  bent  over  the  pillars,  nSv*l. 


42 


THE  BOOK   OF  RUTH. 


Even  until  the  latest  times,  the  figurative  repre- 
sentation of  God  as  the  loving  Bridegroom  of  his 
people,  continues,  instructively  and  sublimely,  to 
run  through  Scripture  and  tradition.  Christ  says 
(Matt,  xxiii.  37):  "How  often  would  I  have 
gathered  you,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens 
und"r  her  wings."  Israel  has  rest  (memichah)  when 
God  spreads  out  his  wings  over  them.  The  psalm- 
ist praj  5  to  be  covered  by  the  shadow  of  Jehovah's 
wings.  Br az  says  to  Ruth  (chap.  ii.  12) :  "  May 
thy  reward  be  complete,  since  thou  hast  come  to 
take  refuge  under  the  wings  of  Jehovah,  the  God 
of  Israel."  That  which  Ruth  there  did  with  re- 
spect to  the  God  of  Boaz,  she  now  asks  to  be  per- 
mitted to  do  with  respect  to  Boaz  himself.  The 
husband  gives  "  rest "  to  his  wife  by  spreading  out 
his  wings  over  her.  For  this  reason  the  covering 
of  his  bed,  under  which  he  took  the  wife:  was 
designated  by  the  beautiful  term,  "wing"  (cf. 
Deut.  xxiii.  1  [E.  V.  xxii.  30],  etc.)  Very  at- 
tractive is  the  use  of  this  expression,  with  figura- 
tive application  to  God,  in  Ezekiel,  when  Jehovah, 
speaking  through  the  prophet,  says  (ch.  xvi.  8) : 
"Behold,  thy  time  was  the  time  of  love;  and  I 
spread  out  my  wing  over  thee,  and  covered  thy 
nakedness,  .  .  .  and  entered  into  a  covenant 
with  thee."  As  the  chicken  takes  refuge  under 
the  wings  of  the  hen,  so  Ruth  hid  herself  under  a 
corner  of  the  coverlet  of  Boaz.  It  was  the  sym- 
bol of  the  right  which  she  had  come  to  claim. 
"  Spread  out  thy  wings  over  thy  handmaid ;  for 
thou  art  a  redeemer  (goel).  It  is  because  he  is  a 
blood-relative  that  she  can  make  this  demand. 
Hence,  she  does  not  say,  I  am  Ruth,  the  Moabitess ; 
but,  I  am  Ruth,  thy  handmaid.  Here,  where  she 
lays  claim  to  an  Israelitish  right,  she  drops  all  re- 
membrance of  Moab.  And  has  he  not  himself 
received  and  treated  her  as  an  Israelitish  maiden  1 
Undoubtedly  this  symbolical  method  of  claiming 
the  most  delicate  of  all  rights,  presupposes  man- 
ners of  patriarchal  simplicity  and  virtue.  The 
confidence  of  the  woman  reposes  itself  on  the  honor 
of  the  man.  The  method,  however,  was  one  which 
could  not  easily  be  brought  into  operation.  For 
every  foreknowledge  or  pre-intimation  of  it  would 
have  torn  the  veil  of  silence  and  secrecy  from  the 
modesty  of  the  claimant.  But  when  it  was  once 
put  into  operation,  the  petition  preferred  could  not 
be  denied  without  disgrace  either  to  the  woman 
or  the  man.  Hence,  we  may  be  sure  that  Naomi 
did  not  send  her  daughter-in-law  on  this  errand 
without  the  fullest  confidence  that  it  would  prove 
successful.  For  it  is  certain  that  to  all  other  diffi- 
culties, this  peculiar  one  was  added  in  the  present 
case :  namely,  that  Boaz,  as  Ruth  herself  says,  was 
indeed  a  goel,  but  not  the  goel.  The  answer  of 
Boaz,  also,  suggests  the  surmise  that  such  a  claim 
was  not  wholly  unexpected  by  him.  Not  that  he 
had  an  understanding  with  Naomi,  in  consequence 
of  which  he  was  alone  on  the  threshing-floor ;  for 
the  fact  that  he  was  startled  out  of  his  sleep,  shows 
that  the  night  visit  was  altogether  unlooked  for. 
But  the  thought  that  at  some  time  the  claim  of 
Ruth  to  the  rights  of  blood-relationship  might  be 
addressed  to  himself,  may  not  have  been  strange 
to  him.  Even  this  conjecture,  however,  of  what 
might  possibly  or  probably  take  place,  could  not 
lie  used  to  relieve  Ruth  of  the  necessity  of  manifest- 
ing her  own  free  will  by  means  of  the  symbolical 
firoceeding.  The  ancient  usage  spoke  a  discreet 
anguage,  with  which  not  even  a  certain  mutual 
understanding  would  have  dispensed.  For  the 
•est,  how  truly  the  action  of  Ruth,  far  from  cloud- 
ng  her  womanly  delicacy,  was  a  new  evidence  of 


the  nobility,  purity,  and  genuine  love  that  ruled 
her,  is  unequivocally  testified  to  by  the  answer  of 
Boaz. 

Ver.  10.  Blessed  be  thou  of  Jehovah,  my 
daughter !  Thou  hast  made  thy  latter  kindnesn 
even  more  beautiful  than  the  former.  This  an- 
swer also  opens  to  our  view  the  simple,  unassum- 
ing soul  of  Boaz,  whose  modesty  and  sincere  heart- 
iness are  truly  admirable.  He  makes  no  complaint 
of  being  disturbed  in  the  night,  nor  of  the  too 
great  importunateness,  as  another  might  have 
deemed  it,  with  which  the  request  is  made.  On 
the  one  hand,  he  entertains  no  thought  of  abusing 
the  confidence  of  the  woman,  nor  on  the  other  does 
he  play  the  modern  conserver  of  virtue,  who  loudly 
blames  another  because  he  distrusts  himself.  He 
has  only  words  of  divine  benediction  for  the  blame- 
less woman,  so  attractive  in  her  naive  humility. 
He  knows  how  to  value  her  act  in  its  purely  ob- 
jective character,  apart  from  every  consideration 
of  its  relation  to  himself,  as  only  a  heart  trained 
by  the  word  of  God  could  do.  He  blesses  Ruth, 
whom  like  a  father  he  addresses  as  "  my  daughter," 
because  he  found  her  present  kindness  yet  nobler 
and  more  beautiful  than  the  former.  But  how  is 
that  to  be  understood  1  Ruth's  former  kindness 
approved  itself,  when,  after  the  death  of  her 
husband,  she  left  parents  and  home  in  order  to 
console  and  take  care  of  her  mother-in-law,  un- 
moved by  the  certainty  of  misery  and  humiliation 
in  a  foreign  land.  What  does  she  now  1  Young, 
comely,  and  favorably  known,  she  might  before 
this  have  looked  out  a  husband  according  to  her 
wish,  rich  or  poor,  from  among  the  young  men  of 
Israel.  Did  she  do  it  ?  By  no  means ;  she  subor- 
dinates every  such  possibility  to  her  mother-in-law 
and  the  usages  of  Israel.  Instead  of  preferring  the 
love  of  a  young  man,  as  were  natural,  —  says  Boaz, 
—  thou  comest  to  assert  thy  right  with  one  more 
advanced  in  life,  solely  because  he  is  a  goel.  Thou 
askest  him  for  the  protection  of  his  wings,  in  order 
that  a  blood-relative  may  again  raise  up  a  name 
for  thy  husband  and  mother-in-law  in  Israel.  In 
this,  also,  thou  offerest  thine  own  heart  and  happi- 
ness as  a  sacrifice  of  love  to  thy  family  !  It  is  in- 
deed possible  that  as  Boaz  intimates,  Ruth's  pres- 
ent act  of  kindness  was  even  a  severer  test  of  her 
love  than  the  earlier.  For  those,  done  in  the  time 
of  sorrow  and  mourning,  were  for  that  very  reason 
easier  than  this,  rendered  at  a  time  when  perhaps 
a  new  life  and  fresh  joy  had  been  offered  her.  But 
the  modesty  of  Boaz  was  too  great.  It  is  doubt- 
less correct  to  think  of  him  as  a  contemporary 
of  Elimelech,  and  consequently  no  longer  young. 
But  in  ancient  as  in  modern  tunes,  a  woman  like 
Ruth  will  find  a  more  engaging  "  rest "  with  s 
man  like  Boaz  than  she  would  find  among  thou- 
sands of  young  men. 

Ver.  11.  Arid  now,  my  daughter,  fear  not. 
Trembling  with  excitement,  Ruth  had  done  as  she 
had  been  directed;  and  in  the  darkness  of  the 
night,  the  tremulous  tones  of  her  voice  had  in- 
formed Boaz  of  her  anxiety.  What  he  had  hitherto 
said,  contained  no  decision,  but  only  praise.  She, 
however,  trembles  for  the  answer  to  her  prayer,  on 
which  so  much  depended.  Hence,  he  says,  again 
addressing  her  by  the  kindly  name  of  daughter, 
"  fear  not."  As  above  he  invoked  on  her,  in  Je- 
hovah's name,  a  full  reward,  because,  led  by  love 
to  Israel,  she  had  trustfully  come  to  take  refuge  un- 
der the  wings  of  Israel's  God,  so  he  will  not  deny 
her  who  has  come  to  himself  to  ask  for  the  pro- 
tection of  his  "  resting-place."  Her  Moabitish  na- 
tionality can  offer  no  obstacle,  since  he  has  already 


CHAPTER  in.   7-18. 


43 


commended  her  to  the  blessing  of  Jehovah.  She 
has  shown  no  Moabitish  morals.  There  exists  no 
ground  whatever  for  denying  her  the  rights  of  Is- 
rael. For  the  whole  gate  of  my  people  knows 
that  thou  art  a  brave  woman.  In  the  words 
"  my  people,"  he  hints  at  the  sole  reason  on  which 
a  refusal  could  base  itself.  But  there  is  no  Israel- 
ite among  us  in  Bethlehem,  who  does  not  know 
how  good  thou  art.1  Whatever  thou  hast  a  right 
to  claim,  can  be  unhesitatingly  done  for  thee,  for 
thou  art  loved  by  all. 

Ver.  12.  But  yet  there  is  a  redeemer  nearer 
than  I.2  These  words  teach  us  that  what  Ruth 
demanded  was  an  actual  objective  right,  which  be- 
longed to  her.  Although  Boaz  perhaps  surmised 
that,  apart  from  the  consideration  of  her  right,  she 
applied  with  special  confidence  to  himself  for  the 
boon  desired,  he  modestly  and  considerately  de- 
cides only  on  the  question  of  her  formal  right. 
Her  proceeding  receives  its  unimpeachable  justifi- 
cation only  when  putting  aside  every  personal  in- 
clination, it  simply  regards  the  matter  of  right. 
Thy  claim,  he  says,  cannot  be  gainsaid  ;  but  I  am 
not  the  one  to  whom  it  is  to  be  directed  in  the  first 
instance.  There  is  another,  who  is  more  nearly 
related  to  Elimelech.  But  he  does  not  leave  her  a 
moment  in  doubt,  whether  this  be  not  an  excuse 
for  refusing  her  petition.  If  that  other  person 
prove  not  able  to  fulfill  his  duty,  then  he  himself 
will  do  it.  This  he  confirms  with  an  oath  by  the 
living  God.  Nor  will  she  be  required  to  repeat  the 
proceeding  of  this  night.  A  noble,  womanly  heart 
—  this  is  what  his  tenderness  implies  —  does  not 
dare  to  undertake  such  a  mission  more  than  once. 
He  himself  will  prosecute  the  matter.  The  sym- 
bolic act  with  which  she  came  to  him,  addressed 
itself  not  so  much  to  him,  individually,  as  through 
him  >o  the  whole  family.  Perhaps  he  knew  verv 
well  that  Naomi  had  for  good  reasons  sent  Ruth  to 
his  threshing-floor,  —  that  the  other  relative  would 
not  be  able  to  act  as  redeemer ;  but  it  is  best  for 
both  Ruth  and  himself  that  due  regard  be  had  to 
formal  right. 

Ver.  1 3  If.  Abide  here  to-night ;  he  down  un- 
til the  morning.  He  repeats  the  same  injunction 
twice.  He  cannot  send  her  away  in  the  darkness  of 
night ;  nor  is  he  afraid  to  let  her  remain.  She,  for 
her  part,  hears  his  words,  and  obeys,  with  equal 
confidence.  But  she  is  only  to  remain  till  earliest 
dawn.  Before  it  was  possible  to  recognize  each 
other  clearly,3  both  were  up ;  that  it  might  not 
be  known  that  the  woman  came  into  the  floor.* 
By  an  early  departure,  he  hopes  that  Ruth 
may  escape  meeting  with  any  one,  who  might 
put  injurious  suspicions  into  circulation.  He  un- 
doubtedly speaks  of  "the   woman,"  with  special 

1  "All  know  that  thou  art  a  good  woman."  The  LXX., 
with   singular    literalness,   render    7,n   iltTS  by  yu^ 

2  The  Midrash(fturt  Rnbba,  p.  34  b),  which  would  fain 
hold  fast  to  the  letter  of  the  law,  which  speaks  only  of  the 
brother  as  goett  thinks  that  the  name  of  the  nearer  relative 
was  Tob  (cf.  ver.  13).  As  if  Boaz  had  intended  to  say  :  "  If 
Tob  will  redeem  thee,  let  him  redeem."  But  Ibn  Ezra  already 
found  tins  unsuitable,  and  ch.  iv.  maKes  it  wholly  impossible. 

8  The  Talmud  [Beracliorh,  p.  9  a)  teaches  how  to  measure 
the  break  of  day.  The  Mishna  had  decided  day-break  to 
legin  when  it  becomes  possible  to  distinguish  between 
white  and  blue  ;  R.  Mair,  when  a  wolf  and  a  dog  —  R. 
tkiba,  when  an  ass  and  a  wild  ass  —  could  be  distinguished. 
ffBut  others  said,  when  one  sees  and  recognizes  another 
person  at  the  distance  of  four  ells." 

*  [Wright  .  "  These  words  express  Boaz's  opinion,  which 
u  had  previously  intimated  to  Ruth  ;    for  the  use  of  the 


emphasis.  It  would  have  been  very  unpleasant  to 
Boaz  to  have  people  connect  himself  with  any  wo- 
man in  a  suspicious  way ;  but  scandalous  rumors 
of  this  kind,  with  Ruth  for  their  object,  would  have 
been  exceedingly  injurious.  To  say  nothing  of 
the  fact  that  an  undeserved  stain  would  have  been 
fixed  on  the  good  name  of  Ruth,  it  would  have 
rendered  it  very  difficult  for  him  to  prosecute  her 
claims  in  Bethlehem.5 

But  as  she  is  about  to  go,  he  bids  her  first  spread 
out  her  cloak  or  shawl,  into  which  he  empties  six 
measures  of  barley,6  to  be  carried  home  to  her 
mother-in-law.  What  is  his  intention  in  this  act  1 
That,  as  he  says,  she  "  come  not  empty  to  her 
mother-in-law."  A  mere  sign  of  his  friendly  dis- 
position, it  cannot  have  been ;  for  Ruth  will  tell 
her  all  that  he  has  said.  He  must  have  had  other 
reasons  for  not  wishing  her  to  go  away  empty.  If 
notwithstanding  every  precaution,  Ruth  was  recog- 
nized when  she  returned  from  the  threshing-Hour, 
her  appearance,  laden  with  grain,  would  be  less 
suspicious,  than  if  she  were  met  dressed  up  as  a 
fine  lady.  Thus  laden,  it  was  usual  to  see  her  come 
from  the  fields  of  Boaz.  Thus,  the  last  occasion 
of  possible  suspicion  was  cut  off.  Still,  the  whole 
significance  of  the  proceeding  is  not  exhausted 
with  this.  Decided  stress  is  laid  on  the  tact  that 
he  gave  her  six  measures  of  barley.  When  Ruth 
comes  home,  and  Naomi  asks,  "  Who  art  thou,  my 
daughter,"  i.  e.  "  how  comest  thou  ?  as  one  whose 
claim  has  been  acknowledged,  or  otherwise  t  "  she 
informs  her  mother-in-law  of  all  that  Boaz  said,  and 
expressly  adds,  what  the  reader  has  already  been 
informed  of,  and  what  if  only  the  liberality  of  the 
giver  came  into  consideration,  Naomi  could  see 
without  being  told  :  "  these  six  measures  of  barley 
gave  he  me."  She  evidently  deems  it  important 
that  Naomi  should  know,  that  he  gave  her  just  six 
measures  of  grain.  The  old  Jewish  expositors 
have  made  all  sorts  of  allegorical  attempts  with 
this  "  six."  They  are  undoubtedly  so  far  right, 
that  apart  from  the  friendly  custom  of  sending  vis- 
itors away  enriched  with  "gifts  for  their  families, 
Boaz,  on  this  occasion,  meant  to  give  a  hint  to  Na- 
omi of  the  result  of  Ruth's  application.  This  re- 
sult was,  that  in  any  event  Ruth  would  obtain  a 
"  resting-place."  The  number  six  is  the  symbol 
of  labor  and  service,  which  is  followed  bv  seven, 
the  time  of  rest.  Whoever  has  served  six  years, 
is  released  in  the  seventh.  Naomi  receives  what 
she  may  take  as  an  intimation  that  the  time  has 
come,  when  after  long  labor  she  must  let  Ruth  go 
out  free.     The  day  of  rest  is  at  hand. 

Ver.  18.  And  she  said,  Remain  quiet  [cf.  Gen. 
xxxviii.  11],  my  daughter.  Ruth  is  to  remain  at 
home,  like  an  affianced  bride.  From  both  words 
article  (the  i.  e.  this  woman)  forbids  us  to  suppose  that 
they  were  actually  addressed  to  Ruth.  The  Targumist, 
probably  influenced  by  this  reason,  and  considering  it  un 
likely  that  Boaz  should  have  been  alone  in  the  threshing 
floor,  renders :  "  and  Boaz  said  to  his  young  men  "  etc 
—  Tr.) 

6  The  Mishna  (Jebamoth,  ii.  8|  determined  that  one  pus. 
pected  of  previous  intercourse  with  a  foreigner,  even  though 
she  were  a  convert,  was  not  allowed  to  perf  >rm  the  duty  of 
levirate  marriage. 

6  The  measure  is  not  given  ;  the  expression  is  simply  ■ 
t(  six  of  barley."  It  made  a  considerable  load,  for  he  had 
to  put  it  on  her.  The  allegorical  interpretation  of  the  Mid- 
rash  (in  the  Targum)  brings  out  six  descendants  of  Ruth, 
namely,  David,  Daniel,  "the  companions  "  (Dan.  i.  6)  and 
"  the  king,  Messias."  Ruth  Rabba,  p.  34  a.  counts  eight 
descendants  with  six  prominent  characteristics.  In  thil 
case,  Hezekiah  and  Josiah  are  added  to  the  others  already 
named. 


1-t 


THE  BOOK  OF   RUTH. 


and  actions  of  Boaz,  Naomi  perceives  that  he  will 
not  rest,  until  he  makes  good  his  promise.  This 
fery  day  will  decide  the  issue  of  the  matter.  And 
whatever  that  issue  may  be,  it  will  not  be  without 
a  blessing.  "  The  man  will  not  rest,  until  he  have 
provided  for  thee  a  resting-place." 

HOMILFTTfUt   AND    PRACTICAL. 

"And  now,  my  daughter,  fear  not;  I  will  do  to 
tliee  all  that  thou  sayest."  The  faith  of  Boaz  is  such 
as  leads  to  action.  He  not  only  instructs,  by  his 
prophetic  words  to  Ruth  (ch.  ii.  12),  and  by  the 
pious  spirit  that  breathes  in  his  intercourse  with 
his  servants  ;  he  not  only  gives,  moved  by  sympa- 
thy sprung  from  faith  ;  he  not  only  enters  into  the 
necessities  and  anxieties  of  Ruth  ;  but  he  has  also 
a  clean  heart,  in  which  no  impure  thought  arises, 
aud  stands  as  firm  in  the  hour  of  temptation  and 
secrecy  as  when  the  eyes  of  all  Bethlehem  are  upon 
him.  He  is  an  Israelite  not  only  before  man,  but 
also  before  God  alone.  And  it  was  because  he  did 
not  forget,  what  man  is  naturally  so  prone  to  for- 
get, that  God  sees  him,  that  he  is  so  mindful  of  his 
duty.  Hypocrites,  when  alone,  are  different  from 
what  they  appear  in  company ;  Israelites  like  Boaz 
feel  and  act  m  the  presence  of  the  all-knowing  God 
alone,  not  otherwise  than  they  would  if  all  the 
6tars  of  heaven  and  all  the  creatures  of  earth  could 
testify  against  them.  Boaz  showed  an  active  faith 
when  he  gave  no  place  to  temptation.  Pious  and 
offenseless  as  he  was  when  Ruth  came  to  claim  the 
right  of  the  poor,  he  is  equally  so  now  when  she 


asks  for  her  right  of  redemption.  Then  the  ques- 
tion was  only  about  a  few  ears  of  grain,  now  it 
involves  his  own  person  and  estate.  Then  he  was 
kind  in  the  presence  of  Ruth's  humility,  now  he  is 
humble  in  the  presence  of  her  claim  to  be  righted. 
Then  he  forgot  herself  in  the  fact  that  she  had  left 
the  land  of  Moab,  now  he  forgets  that  she  had  evi  r 
owned  another  law  than  that  of  Israel.  Then  his 
tender  delicacy  made  Ruth  assured  of  her  safety  in 
his  fields;  now  that  same  delicacy  understands 
that  since  she  has  come  to  him,  the  right  she  claims 
must  be  fulfilled.  He  might  have  released  himself  by 
the  letter  of  the  law  to  which  she  appeals,  —  there 
was  a  nearer  relative  ;  but  his  faith  is  an  active 
faith.  The  question  was  one  of  right,  noi  of 
ingenious  play  with  the  letter.  The  claimant  must 
be  satisfied  ;  and  he  does  what  he  promised  to  do. 
Freely  and  purely,  full  of  that  love  which  is  the 
characteristic  of  faith,  he  keeps  himself  and  keeps 
his  word.  People  speak  of  a  man's  "  word  of 
honor  ;  "  it  were  more  correct  to  speak  of  "  the 
word  of  a  Christian,"  "  the  word  of  a  confessor  of 
God."  For  only  the  Christian  does  not  walk  in 
the  crooked  ways  of  intrigue  and  false  advocates. 

Starke  :  "  Christian,  behold  the  kindness  and 
gentleness  of  Boaz  !  Will  it  then  be  possible  that 
God,  when  thou  art  in  need,  will  send  thee  empty 
away  ?  Never  !  his  generous  hand  is  never  closed. 
Only  open  Him  thy  heart,  and  divine  gifts  flow  in 
upon  thee,  without  any  action  on  thy  part." 

The  same  :  "  A  Christian  must  be  upright  in 
word  and  deed." 


CHAPTER    FOURTH. 


Verses  1-12. 


The  Israelite  without  Guile. 


1  Then  went  Boaz  [And  Boaz  went]  up  to  the  gate,  and  sat  him  down  there  :  and 
behold,  the  kinsman  [redeemer]  of  whom  Boaz  spake  '  came  [passed]  by ;  unto  whom 
he  said,  Ho,  such  a  one  !  turn  aside,  sit  down  here.     And  he  turned  aside,  and  sat 

2  down.     And  he  took  ten  men  of  the  elders  of  the  city,  and  said,  Sit  ye  down  here. 

3  And  they  sat  down.  And  he  said  unto  the  kinsman  [redeemer],  Naomi,  that  is 
come  again  out  of  the  country  [territory]  of  Moab,  selleth   [sold]  a  parcel  of  land 

4  [the  field-portion],  which  ivas  our  brother  Elimelech's  :  And  I  thought  to  advertise 
thee  [determined  to  inform  thee  2],  saying,  Buy  it  before  the  inhabitants  [the  sitters, 
i.  e.  those  present8],  and  before  the  elders  of  my  people.  If  thou  wilt  redeem  it,  redeem 
it ;  but  if  thou  4  wilt  not  redeem  it,  then  tell  me,  that  I  may  know :  for  there  is  none 
to   redeem   it  besides  thee  ;  and  I  am  alter  thee.     And  he   said,  I  will   redeem   it. 

5  Then  said  Boaz.  What  day  thou  buyest s  the  field  of  the  hand  of  Naomi,  thou  must 
buy  [thou  buyest]  it.  also  of  Ruth  the   Moabitess,  the  wife  of  the  dead,  to  raise  up 

6  the  nam,,  of  the  dead  upon  his  inheritance.  And  the  kinsman  [redeemer]  said,  I 
cannot  redeem  it  for  myself,  lest  I  mar  [injure]  mine  own  inheritance  :  redeem  thou 
my  right   [my   redemption,  ;.  e.  that  which  it  is  my  right  or  duty  to  redeem]  to   thyself;  for  I 

7  cannot  redeem  it.  Now  this  was  the  manner  [custom]  in  former  time  in  Israel 
concerning  [in  cases  of  1  redeeming  and  concerning  [in  cases  of  ex-]  changing,  for 
to  confirm  all  things  [every  matter]  ;  a  man  plucked  off  his  shoe,  and  gave  it  to  hia 

8  neighbour:  and  this  was  a  [omit:  a]  testimony6  in  Israel.  Therefore  [And]  the 
kinsman  [redeemer]   said   unto    Boaz,  Buy  it  for  thee.     So  [And]  he  drew  off  las 


CHAPTER   IV.    1-12.  it 


9  shoe.     And  Boaz  said  uuto  tlie  elders,  and  unto  all  the  people,  Ye  are  witnesses  this 
day,  that  I  have  bought   all  that  U'as   Elimeleeh's,  and   all  that  was  Chilion's  and 

10  Mahlon's,  of  the  hand" of  Naomi.  Moreover,  Ruth  the  Moabitess,  the  wife  of  Mah- 
lon,  have  I  purchased  [acquired]7  to  be  my  wife,  to  raise  up  ihe  name  of  the  dead 
upon  his  inheritance,  that  the  name  of  the  dead  be  not  cut  off  from  among  his  breth- 

11  ren,  and  from  the  gate  of  his  place:  ye  are  witnesses  this  day.  And  all  the  people 
that  were  in  the  gate,  and  the  elders,  said.  We  are  witnesses.  The  Lord  [Jehovah] 
make  ihe  woman  that  is  come  [that  cometh]  into  thine  house  like  Rachel  and  like 
Leah,  which  two  did  build  the  house  of  Israel :  and  do  thou  worthily  [lit.  make  thou 

12  strength]  in  Ephratah  and  be  famous  [and  get  a  name]  in  Beth-lehem:  And  If* 
thine°house  be  like  the  house  of  Pharez  [Perets,  Perez],  whom  Tamar  bare  unto 
Judah,  of  the  seed  which  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  shall  give  thee  of  this  young  woman. 

TEXTUAL   AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  1.  — Sc.  "  to  Ruth,''  ch.  iii.  12.  ~IK?S  is  the  accus.  after  "127,  cf'  Gen-  xix-  M  '  xxii1-   16-~0n  the  *""* 

JTVO  and  POtt?.  cf.  Ges.  48,  6;  72,  Rem.  3;  69,3,2;  on  ~ID*1,  72,  Rem.  4.  — Tb.] 
t  t   :  '  "T 

[2  Ver.  4.  —  Lit.  "  And  I  said.  I  will  uncover  thine  ear,"  i.  t.  I  determined  to  inform  thee.     VHON,  is  the  same  In 

sense  as  the  fuller  >3b2  THHS,  Gen.  *™-  17i  etc->  cf-  Ex-  "■  U<  etc-  lt  miSht  be  supposed  to  refer  to  what  Boaz  said 
to  Ruth,  ch.  iii.  12  f. ';  but  asRuttJis  not  spoken  of  until  the  next  verse,  this  is  less  likely.  The  expression  "  to  uncover 
the  ear,''  originated  in  the  practice  of  removing  the  hair  that  hangs  over  the  ear,  for  the  purpose  of  whispering  a  secret 
to  a  person.  In  general  it  means  to  communicate  anything  confidentially,  but  is  here  used  in  the  wider  sense  of  impart- 
ing information.  The  suflVx  of  the  second  per.  in  TJDtS  is  perhaps  best  explained  by  regarding  the  whole  clause  after 
TTIQS  as  mentally  uttered  by  Boaz,  while  considering  how  to  proceed  in  the  matter  of  Ruth.  In  this  consideration, 
the  nearer  kinsman  was  present  to  his  mind,  and  to  him  he  addressed  the  conclusion,  which  he  now  only  rehearses,  "  I 
will  inform  thee,"'  etc.  —  Tr.] 

[3  Ver.  4.  —  So  Dr.  Cassel.  Keil :  "  Many  translate  n,2tL,!'n  by  '  inhabitants,'  sc.  those  of  Bethlehem.  But  although 
according  to  ver.  9,  a  goodly  number  of  the  people,  besides  the  elders,  were  present,  this  can  scarcely  be  conceived  to  have 
been  the  case  with  the  inhabitants  of  Bethlehem  generally,  so  as  to  meet  the  requirement  of  "T22.  Nor  would  the  in- 
habitants have  been  named  before,  but  as  in  ver.  9,  after,  the  elders  as  principal  witnesses  [but  cf.  ver.  11].  for  these 
reasons  2t£7>  is  to  be  taken  in  the  sense  •  to  sit,'  and  D^tt?5!!  is  to  be  understood  of  the  same  persons  who  form  the 
subject  of  !Qt£?s  1  in  ver.  2,  the  elders.  The  following  ^l??  T221  is  to  be  taken  explicatively  :  before  those  who  sit 
here,  even  before  the  elders  of  my  people.''  — Tr.] 

[4  Ver.  4. —  The  Text.  Recept.  reads  bS2\  third  per.,  concerning  which  Keil  remarks,  that  "it  strikes  one  as  singu- 
lar, since  one  expects  the  second  person,  vS2fl,  which  is  not  only  read  by  the  LXX.,  but  also  by  a  number  of  MSS., 
and  seems  to  be  required  by  the  context.  It  is  true,  the  common  reading  may  (with  Sebastian  Schmidt,  Carpzov,  and 
others)  be  defended,  by  assuming  that  in  uttering  this  word  Boaz  turned  to  the  elders,  and  so  spoke  of  the  redeemer  aa 
of  a  third  person  :  'if  he,  the  redeemer  here,  will  not  redeem  ; '  but  as  this  is  immediately  followed  by  a  resumption  of 
the  direct  address,  this  supposition  —  to  our  mind  at  least  —  seems  very  artificial."  —  The  substitution  by  the  Keri  of 

nj?!S1   for    VTK1  is  not  necessary,  cf.  Ges.  127,  3  b.  —  Tr] 
t  :  ■•  :  t  -■  : 

[5  Ver.  5.  —  Ni"V2r?.  Keil :  "  According  to  sense  and  connection,  this  form  must  be  the  second  per.  masc. ;  the  **  at 
the  end  was  either  added  by  a  slip  of  the  pen,  or  it  arose  from  an  original  1,  so  that  we  must  read  either  rTOp  (with 
the  Keri)  without  an  accusative,  or,  with  an  accusative,  ijT2!7,   ' taou  DUVest  •'•'  "  —  Tb.] 

[6  Ver.  7.  —  iTTO.FI.  Gesenius  and  Fiirst  define  this  word  here  as  "custom  having  the  force  of  law,"  "attested 
usage."  Dr.  Cassefs  rendering,  Wiisstkum,  is  probably  intended  to  convey  the  same  idea  (cf.  Hoffmann's  Wortcrb.).  But 
It  Beems  better  to  take  the  word  here  in  its  proper  sense  of  "  attestation,"  as  in  E.  V.  So  the  ancient  versions,  Bertheav. , 
Keil,  etc.    Cf.  the  root  "TO7.  —  Tr.] 

[7  Ver.  10. —  The  Heb.  H2p  is  less  specific  than  our  word  "purchase."  It  means  to  obtain,  to  acquire;  which 
may  be  done  in  a  variety  of  ways.  The  rendering  "  purchased  "  is  unfortunate  in  this  particular  case,  as  it  tends  to 
convey  the  erroneous  idea  that  Ruth  was  treated  as  a  chattel,  or  at  least  as  a  sort  of  ndseripta  gltba.  The  same  word  is 
used  also  in  vers.  4,  5,  and  9,  where  there  is  no  particular  objection  to  represent  it  in  English  by  "  buy,"  although  "  ac- 
quire "  would  be  preferable  for  the  sake  of  uniformity.  —  Tr.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  1 .  And  Boaz  went  up  to  the  gate,  and 
Beated  himself  there.  Very  early,  even  before 
Ruth  with  her  burden  of  barley  had  vet  started  for 
home  (eh.  iii.  15),  Boaz,  energetic  in  deed  as  he 
was  kind  in  word,  took  the  wav  to  Bethlehem.     It 


was  necessary  to  set  out  so  early,  in  order  to  be 
sure  of  reaching  the  gate  before  the  person  with 
whom  he  wished  to  speak,  and  who  like  himself 
was  probably  in  the  habit  of  coming  to  the  city 
from  the  country.  The  gate,  it  is  well  known,  waa 
the  place  where  judicial  business  was  transacted 
and  markets  were  held  (Deut.  xxi.  19  IF. ;  cf.  Ps 


46 


THE  BOOK  O-t    RUTH. 


;xxvii.  5).  This  is  still  the  case  in  the  East.  In 
Zach.  viii.  16,  the  prophet  says :  "Judge  truth  and 
the  judgment  of  peace  in  your  gates;"  on  which 
Jerome  (ed.  Migne,  vi.  p.  1474)  remarks :  "  It  is 
asked,  why  among  the  Jews  the  gate  was  the  place 
for  administering  justice.  The  judges  sat  in  the 
gates  that  the  country-people  might  not  be  com- 
pelled to  enter  the  cities  and  suffer  detriment. 
Sitting  there,  they  could  hear  the  townsmen  and 
country-people  as  they  left  or  entered  the  city;  and 
each  man,  his  business  finished,  could  return  at 
once  to  his  own  house."  At  the  gate  was  the 
proper  forum ;  and  it  is  certainly  more  satisfactory 
than  all  other  explanations  of  the  Latin  word,  to 
derive  it,  notwithstanding  the  later  central  situa-! 
tion  of  the  place  to  which  it  was  applied,  from  the  j 
archaic  fora,  gate,  whence  foras,  cf.  biforis,  septiforis. 
Certain  Some-one,  come  and  seat  thyself. 
We  have  here  the  whole  course  of  an  ancient  legal 
procedure  before  us,  with  its  usages  and  forms. 
The  fact  that  Boaz  sat  at  the  gate,  plainly  declared  i 
that  he  sought  a  judicial  decision.  When  the  per- 
son for  whom  he  waited  made  his  appearance,  he 
made  no  delay  to  seat  himself  as  requested,  for  the 
language  addressed  to  him  was  a  formal  judicial  sum- 
mons. His  name  is  not  mentioned.  Peloni  almoin 
is  a  formula  like  our  German  N.  N.  [used  as  in  Eng- 
lish we  now  generally  use  a  simple or  "  blank."  j 

—  Tr.]  In  former  times.it  was  customary  among 
us,  in  legal  documents,  to  use  in  the  same  way 
Dames  that  were  very  common,  such  as  Hans,  etc. 
(cf.  my  Erf.  Bilder  u.  Brauche,j>.  29).  The  un- 
derlying idea  of  Peloni  almoni  is  a  different  one 
from  that  of  SfTva.  (cf.  Matth.  xxvi.  18)  or  nuidam. 
It  intimates  that  the  name  is  unknown  and  hidden. 
It  conveys  the  idea  of  anonymus,  in  every  sense  of 
the  word.  There  is  an  ancient  explanation  to  the 
effect  that  the  name  of  the  first  god  is  not  given, 
because  he  was  unwilling  to  raise  up  a  name  for 
his  deceased  relative.  This  is  the  reason,  probably, 
why  the  LXX.  here  have  Kpitpte,  "  hidden  one." 
Without  maintaining  this,  but  even  supposing 
that  the  narrator  omitted  the  name  merely  because 
he  did  not  know  it,  it  remains  none  the  less  an 
instructive  fact  that  he  who  was  so  anxious  for  the 
preservation  of  his  own  inheritance,  is  now  not 
even  known  by  name. 

Ver.  2.  He  took  ten  men  of  the  elders  of  the 
city.  That  the  number  of  elders  in  any  city  was 
not  necessarily  limited  to  ten,  may  be  inferred  from 
Judg.  viii.  14 ;  but  ten  were  sufficient  to  form  a 
college  of  witnesses.  In  post-biblical  times  it  was 
a  maxim  that  an  assembly  for  religious  worship 

(ml?,  "congregation"),  must  consist  of  ten  per- 
sons (cf.  the  Jerus.  Targum  on  Ex.  xii.  4) ;  but 
the  attempt  of  the  Mishna  (Sanhedrin,  i.  6)  to 
ground  this  biblically  on  the  supposed  fact  that  the 
ten  faithless  spies  are  spoken  of  as  a  congregation 
(Num.  xiv.  27),  can  hardly  be  deemed  satisfactory. 
The  custom,  however,  of  selecting  exactly  ten  men 
for  such  service  as  was  here  required,  was  so  old 
and  well-established  among  the  Jews,  that  the  term 

]^3!D,    "  number,"  by   itself,   meant  ten  persons. 

1  ^3HnS.  It  is  only  necessary  to  refer  to  the  Com- 
mentaries of  Bertheau  and  Keil,  to  perceive  in  what  respects 
1  have  deeme-i  it  needful  to  depart  from  their  expositions  of 
khis  passage.  Benary  (dc  Hrbr&orttm  Leviratu,  Berlin, 
1835,  p  23  ff ),  following  Jewish  example,  has  made  Boaz 
a  nephew,  and  the  Peloni  a  brother,  of  Elimelech.     But  no 

peat  stress  is  to  be  laid  on  this  tradition.  nW,  brother, 
u  our  passage  itself  shows,  is  often  used  where  the  rela- 
ionship    is  more  distant  than  that  which  exists   between 


Others,  it  is  true,  as  we  learn  further  on,  had  assem 
bled  about  the  two  relatives ;  but  the  ten  elden 
formed,  so  to  speak,  the  necessary  official  witnesses. 
Ver.  3.  The  inheritance  of  onr  brother1 
Elimelech,  Naomi  has  sold.  The  expositors, 
with  one  consent,  demand  by  what  right  Naomi 
could  sell  the  inheritance  of  Elimelech,  since  the 
Mosaic  law  contains  nothing  to  indicate  that  it 
considered  the  widow  as  the  rightful  heir  of  her 
deceased  husband.  But  this  view  of  the  law  is 
incorrect.-  The  whole  system  of  leviratical  marriage 
presupposes  that  the  title  of  the  deceased  husband's 
property  vests  in  the  widow.  When  a  man  dies 
childless,  leaving  a  widow,  the  brother  of  the  de- 
ceased is  to  marry  her,  in  order  "  that  the  first-born 
may  enter  upon  the  name  of  the  dead,"  ;'.  e.  that 
the  name  of  the  dead  may  continue  to  be  connected 
with  the  inheritance  which  he  has  left  behind,  for  in 
no  other  sense  can  the  expression  "  to  raise  up  the 
name  of  one  "  have  any  meaning  in  Israel ;  and, 
accordingly,  in  ver.  5  the  words  of  the  law,  "  to 
raise  up  the  name  of  the  dead,"  are  supplemented 
by  the  addition,  "  upon  his  inheritance."  But  in 
case  the  brother-in-law  refused  to  marry  the  widow, 
and  consequently  refused  to  raise  up  the  name  of 
his  brother,  he  thereby  also  gave  up  all  right  to  en- 
ter on  the  inheritance  of  his  brother.  The  duty  and 
the  right  were  indissolubly  connected.  The  law 
would  have  been  illusory,  if  the  brother,  notwith- 
standing his  refusal  to  marry  the  widow,  had  ob- 
tained the  inheritance.  In  that  case,  possession 
remained  with  the  widow,  who,  albeit  childless, 
carried  within  herself,  so  to  speak,  the  embryonic 
right  of  the  heir.  Of  the  symbolical  act  of  drawing 
off  the  shoe,  we  shall  speak  farther  on.  But  it  is 
to  be  noted  here  that  when  the  widow  drew  off  the 
shoe  of  the  recusant  brother-in-law,  she  thereby 
declared  that  he  must  withdraw  his  foot  from  the 
possessions  of  his  brother. 

Naomi  was  a  widow.  But  although  she  herself 
says  (ch.  i.  12)  that  she  is  too  old  to  become  a  wife, 
even  this  fact  gives  no  right  to  her  property  to  any 
blood-relative,  without  marriage.  Undoubtedly, 
the  name  of  her  husband  would  vanish  from  his 
estate  as  soon  as  she  died  ;  but  until  then  it  re- 
mained upon  it,  and  Naomi  had  the  same  right 
and  power  to  dispose  of  the  property  as  the  law 
gave  to  the  husband  himself.  Now,  in  Lev.  xxv. 
25,  we  read :  "  If  thy  brother  become  impover- 
ished and  sell  his  possession,  let  his  nearest  blood- 
relative  (3~'i^L'  "* '£W)  come  to  him,  and  redeem 
that  which  his  brother  sold."  This  contingency 
was  here  actually  come  to  pass.  Naomi  had  be- 
come impoverished,  —  she  had  sold.  The  name  of 
Elimelech  was  still  on  the  property :  consequently 
the  law  demanded  its  redemption,  and  directed 
this  demand  to  the  nearest  blood-relative.  It  is 
on  the  basis  of  this  prescription,  that  Boaz  begins 
his  negotiation  with  the  unnamed  kinsman,  in  the 
interest  of  Naomi. 

The  sale  of  the  land  had  hitherto  not  been  men- 
tioned. Nothing  was  said  about  it  in  the  conver- 
sation between  Ruth  and  Boaz  on  the  threshing- 
floor.     The  fact  that  Boaz  knew  of  it,  confirms  the 

sons  of  the  same  parent.  Blood-relatives,  and  even  friends, 
are  also  t(  brothers."  The  very  law,  by  which  the  usage 
now  under  consideration  is  sanctioned,  uses  the  term  in  a 
wider  sense,  Deut.  xxv.  5  (cf.  Hengst.  Pentateuch,  ii.  83  ff., 
Ryland's  ed.). 

2  Compare  the  later  determinations  in  the  Mishna  (Jeha- 
moth,  4,  3),  the  spirit  of  which,  at  least,  confirms  what  is 
Baid  in  the  text.  Both  Rabbinical  schools  admit  that  • 
wife  can  sell. 


CHAPTER  IV.    i-12. 


47 


surmise  that  before  Ruth  came  to  him  with  her 
great  request,  he  and  Naomi  had  already  had  some 
communication  with  each  other.  These  communi- 
cations, having  reference  to  the  sale  of  the  land, 
and  the  necessity  of  its  redemption  according  to 
law,  may  be  regarded  as  having  ultimately  led  to 
the  proposition  made  by  Naomi  in  ch.  iii.  1 .  Naomi 
advanced  from  the  redemption  of  the  land  to  that 
of  the  widow,  just  as  Boaz  d"ns  here  in  his  negotia- 
tion with  the  nearer  kinsman. 

Ver.  4.  Buy  it  before  these  who  sit  here, 
and  before  the  elders  of  my  people.  Boaz  had 
said  to  Ruth,  that  he  would  ask  the  nearest  kins- 
man whether  he  "  will  redeem  thee ;  and  if  not, 
then  will  I  redeem  thee."  But  this  is  not  the  way 
in  which  he  opens  his  address  to  the  man.  He 
does  not  mention  the  name  of  Ruth  at  first.  He 
.  desires  of  him  apparently  only  the  redemption  of 
the  land.  This  testifies  to  the  uncommon  deli- 
cacy of  legal  proceedings  at  that  time,  as  con- 
ducted by  pious  and  believing  persons.  The  cause 
is  entirely  saved  from  appearing  as  if  Boaz  had 
begun  it  only  in  behalf  of  the  woman.  Nor  does 
Boaz  put  the  nearer  kinsman  under  any  constraint ; 
for  he  says  at  once :  "  If  thou  wilt  not  redeem  it, 
then  will  I,  for  I  come  next."  He  admonishes  the 
other  of  the  duty  imposed  on  him  by  the  law,  by 
the  recognition  of  his  own ;  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  he  facilitates  the  other's  decision,  by  inti- 
mating his  readiness  to  render  the  service  de- 
manded, if  the  other  should  prefer  to  be  excused. 
He  says  nothing  of  Ruth's  connection  with  the 
matter.  He  leaves  it  to  the  kinsman  himself  to 
take  the  open  and  generally  known  relations  be- 
tween Naomi  and  Ruth  into  consideration,  and  to 
shape  his  answer  accordingly.  His  address  is 
gentle,  noble,  and  discreet.  It  brings  no  complaint 
that  the  kinsman  as  nearest  relative  has  not  troub- 
led himself  about  the  matter  in  hand.  It  asks 
nothing  of  the  other,  that  he  is  not  willing  to  do 
himself.  It  is  sufficiently  discreet  to  wait  and  see 
how  far  the  other  will  limit  his  duty.  And  withal, 
the  interest  and  decision  with  which  he  urges  the 
matter  to  a  conclusion,  make  the  transaction  a 
forcible  example  to  the  people,  teaching  them  to 
make  the  law  a  living  spirit,  and  openly  to  ac- 
knowledge the  duties  which  it  imposes. 

And  he  said,  I  will  redeem.  The  kinsman, 
therefore,  acknowledges  the  right  of  Naomi  to  sell, 
and  also  his  own  duty  to  redeem.  But  he  thinks 
only  of  the  land.  He  answers  the  question  of  Boaz 
only  according  to  the  literal  import  of  its  terms. 
By  saying,  "I  will  redeem,"  he  declares  his  readi- 
ness to  buy  back  the  land  left  by  Elimelech,  but 
his  words  do  not  indicate  whether  he  is  conscious 
of  the  further  duties  therewith  connected.  Boaz 
may  have  expected  that  he  would  make  further 
inquiry  concerning  them ;  but  as  he  did  not  do 
this,  Boaz  could  not  rest  contented  with  the  brief 
reply,  "  I  will  redeem,"  seeing  that  he  was  chiefly 
Bolicitous  about  the  future  of  Ruth,  and  that  the 
duty  to  redeem  not  only  the  land  but  also  the 
widow  must  be  expressly  acknowledged  before  all 
who  were  present.     Hence  he  says  farther : 

Ver.  5.  In  the  day  that  thou  buyest  the 
field  of  Naomi,  thou  buyest  it  also  of  Ruth  the 
Moabitess,  ....  to  raise  up  the  name  of 
the  dead  upon  his  inheritance.  With  these 
words,  the  law  of  entailment  as  recognized  in  Is- 
rael, becomes  perfectly  clear.  Elimelech  had  left 
ions,  who,  had  they  lived,  would  have  been  the 

i  This  view  of  the  reason  of  the  refusal  is  also  indicated 
oy  the  Midrash  (Ruth  Rabba  35  a).  Le  Clerc  is  very  far 
from  the  right  understanding.     Other  opinions,  to  which  he 


proper  heirs.  But  they  died.  Now,  if  Ruth  had 
not  come  from  Moab  with  Naomi,  Naomi  would 
have  been  the  sole  possessor  of  the  land.  Having 
no  means  to  cultivate  it,  she  could  hare  sold  it 
and  the  blood-relative  could  have  bought  it  back 
without  taking  upon  himself  levirate  duties,  sine? 
her  age  rendered  it  improbable  that  they  wouk 
answer  the  purpose  for  which  they  were  instituted. 
But  Ruth  did  come  ;  and  having  entered  into  the 
Israelitish  community,  she  also  possesses  Israelit- 
ish  rights.  She  is,  consequently,  the  heiress  of 
Mahlon  ;  and  no  one  can  redeem  her  inheritance, 
without  at  the  same  time  providing  for  the  contin- 
uance of  the  name  of  the  dead.  In  her  case,  con- 
siderations like  those  which  applied  to  Naomi, 
have  no  existence.  Her  husband  Mahlon,  whether 
he  were  the  younger  or  the  older  brother,  was  an 
heir.  Since  Orpah  remained  in  Moab,  the  claims 
of  Chilion  as  heir,  were  also  transferred  to  the  es- 
tate of  his  brother.  Separate  possessions  of  their 
own,  the  sons  of  Elimelech  probably  had  not,  as 
long  as  they  lived  in  Israel.  Consequently,  the  land 
was  the  joint  possession  of  Naomi  and  Ruth.  And 
just  because  Ruth  was  part  proprietress,  the  obli- 
gation existed  not  to  let  the  names  of  Elimelech 
and  Mahlon  perish.  The  inheritance  alone  could 
not,  therefore,  be  redeemed,  as  the  anonymous  rel- 
ative proposed  to  do. 

Ver.  6.  And  the  redeemer  said,  I  cannot  re- 
deem it  for  myself,  lest  I  injure  mine  own  in- 
heritance. Thus  far  the  kinsman  has  accurately 
acknowledged  his  duty  as  prescribed  by  the  Mosaic 
law.  He  is  ready  to  redeem  the  land.  Nor  does 
he  challenge  the  right  of  Ruth,  as  wife  of  the  de- 
ceased Mahlon.  Why  then  does  he  think  that  the 
performance  of  levirate  duty  to  her  will  damage 
his  own  inheritance  ?  For  although  accepted  even 
by  the  most  recent  expositors,  the  idea  that  he  is 
influenced  by  the  thought  that  the  land  which  he 
is  to  buy  with  his  own  money  will  one  day  belong 
not  to  himself,  but  to  his  son  by  Ruth,  has  no 
great  probability.  There  is  something  forced  in 
an  exegesis  that  makes  a  father  regard  it  as  a  per- 
sonal detriment  and  injury  when  his  own  son  en- 
ters upon  an  inheritance.  Nor  could  the  kinsman 
justify  himself  with  a  ground  so  external,  before  the 
assembly  present.  No ;  as  he  has  hitherto  not 
failed  to  honor  the  requirements  of  the  law,  it  is  to 
be  assumed  that  he  deems  his  present  refusal  also 
to  be  not  in  contravention  of  its  provisions.  Boaz 
here  expressly  speaks  of  Ruth  as  the  "  Moabitess." 
It  must  be  her  Moabitish  nationality  that  forms 
the  ground,  such  as  it  is,  of  the  kinsman's  refusal. 
Elimelech's  misfortunes  had  been  popularly  as- 
cribed to  his  emigration  to  Moab ;  the  death  of 
Chilion  and  Mahlon  to  their  marriage  with  Moab- 
itish women.  This  it  was  that  had  endangered 
their  inheritance.  The  goel  fears  a  similar  fate.1 
He  thinks  that  he  ought  not  to  take  into  his  house 
a  woman,  marriage  with  whom  has  already  been 
visited  with  the  extinguishment  of  a  family  in  Is- 
rael. To  him,  the  law  against  intermarriage  with 
Moabites,  does  not  appear  to  be  suspended  in  favor 
of  Ruth.  He  is  unwilling  to  endanger  his  own 
family  and  inheritance ;  and  as  Ruth  is  a  Moab 
itess.'he  holds  it  possible  to  decline  what  in  any 
other  case  he  would  deem  an  imperative  duty. 

The  man  appears  to  be  superstitious,  and  de- 
voted to  the  letter  of  the  law.  He  sees  only  its 
formal  decisions,  not  the  love  that  animates  it.  He 
fears;   but  love  knows   no  fear.     From  anxious 

refers,  come  no  nearer  to  it.  Cf.  Selden,  Uxor  Hebroa,  lib.  L 
cap.  9. 


18 


THE  BOOK  OF  RUTH. 


regard  to  the  lower,  he  overlooks  the  higher  duty. 
He  thinks  of  Moab ;  whereas  Ruth  has  taken 
refuge  under  the  wings  of  the  God  of  Israel.  He 
loes  not  comprehend  the  difference  of  the  condi- 
tions under  which  Mahlnn  once  married  her,  and 
those  under  which  he  is  now  called  upon  to  act 
toward  her.  He  knows  not  how  to  distinguish 
times  and  spirits.  The  legal  severity  which  he 
would  bring  to  bear  on  the  noble  woman,  recoils 
on  himself.  He  is  unwilling  to  endanger  his  name 
and  inheritance,  and  —  history  does  not  even  know 
his  name.  While  the  guilt  of  Elimelech  and  his 
sons  is  removed  through  the  love  of  Ruth,  so  that 
their  name  survives,  his  lovelessness  toward  Ruth 
is  visited  by  namelessness.1  What  a  priceless 
lesson  is  hereby  taught !  What  an  honor  does  it 
award  to  love,  and  what  a  punishment  does  it  hold 
out  to  the  superstitious  Pharisee ! 

Ver.  7  f.  Formerly,-  in  cases  of  redemption 
and  exchange,  a  man  pulled  off  his  shoe  and 
gave  it  to  the  other.  The  symbolism  of  the  shoe, 
as  it  existed  in  Israel  and  among  other  nations,  has 
been  so  wretchedly  misunderstood  and  perverted, 
especially  in  the  books  of  a  man  whose  distorted 
and  dishonest  compilations  will  be  injurious  to 
many  (Nork's  Mythd.  der  Volkssagen,  p.  459,  etc.), 
that  it  will  be  worth  the  trouble  to  explain  it,  at 
least  in  outline. 

The  shoe  is  the  symbol,  first,  of  motion  and  wan- 
dering ;  secondlv,  of  rest  and  possession.  The  fol- 
lowing mav  serve  t"  illustrate  the  first  of  these  signi- 
fications :  When  Israel  is  directed  to  eat  the  Passover 
in  a  state  of  readiness  for  instant  departure,  among 
other  specific  injunctions,  is  this  :  "  your  shoes  on 
your  feet  "  (Ex.  xii.  1 1 ).  With  reference  to  the  wan- 
derings through  the  desert,  it  is  said  :  "  thy  shoe 
did  not  grow  "Id  "  (Deut.  xxix.  4  (5)),  etc.3  The 
wanderings  of  the  gods  form  a  singular  feature  of 
the  old  heathenism,  in  its  search  after  God.  The 
fact  of  their  passage  was  often  supposed  to  be  at- 
tested by  the  footprints  they  left  behind ;  but  in 
Chemmis  in  Egypt,  a  blessing  ensued  (as  Herodo- 
tus tells  us,  ii.  91)  whenever  the  gigantic  shoe  of 
Perseus  was  seen.  It  was  not  the  shoe,  but  the 
god,  who  brought  the  blessing.  Heathendom,  es- 
pecially Germanic  heathendom,  continued  to  search 
and  wander  even  after  death.  The  dead,  when 
buried,  were  provided  with  an  helsko,  or  shoe,  for 
the  journey  they  bail  to  make  (Grimm,  Mi/th.  795). 
Even  until"  comparatively  recent  times,  there  were 
popular  legends  concerning  deceased  persons  who 
lament  that  they  received  no  shoe  (Stober,  Elsus- 
sische  Sagrn,  p.  34).  In  certain  districts,  any  last 
token  of  respect  shown  the  dead  is,  perhaps  to  this 
verv  day,  called  "  the  dead-man's  shoe."  The  sor- 
rowful idea  expressed  in  the  practice  was  that  the 
1.  id  must  be  helped  on  in  his  last  journey.  Sim- 
rock's  explanation  concerning  good  works  is  en- 
tirely erroneous  [Myth.  154).  The  passage  of 
Pope  Gregory  on  Ex.  xii.  11,  means  something  al- 
together different.  Gregory  intends  there  to  refer 
to  tlie  example  of  pious  persons  who  have  gone  be- 
l.  ic.  The  Christian  Church  opposed,  rather  than 
favored,  the  heathen  usage. 

i  Tbe  Greeks  also  spoke  of  an  oTkos  aviowfj-os  yevofievos, 
In  case  a  family  died  out  without  leaving  heirs  to  its  name, 
Cf.  hoeratest  xix.  35. 

s  72^35  /.  Formerly  it  was  customary  to  pull  off  the 
«hoe  on  every  occasion  of  exchange  or  barter;  now,  i.  e.  at 
the  time  when  the  writer  of  our  Book  lived,  it  was  done  only 
in  the  special  case  contemplated  in  Deut.  xxv.  7  ff.,  and 
then  it  was  removed  not  by  the  man  himself,  but  by  the 


Of  cognate  and  yet  very  different  signification 
are  certain  passages  of  the  Talmud  and  the  Mid- 
rash  (Jerus.  Talmud,  Kelajim,  §  9,  p.  23,  b; 
Midrash  Rabba,§  100,  p.  88a),  where  the  aged 
teacher  desires  that  when  he  is  buried  sandals  may 
be  fastened  to  his  feet,  in  order  that  he  may  be  able 
to  follow  after  the  Messiah  as  soon  as  He  comes. 

Luther  gave  utterance  to  the  saying :  "  Tie  a 
pair  of  sandals  to  his  door,  and  let  them  be  called 
'  Surge  et  ambu/a.' "  Hence  also  the  still  current 
popular  superstition  of  throwing  the  shoe  on  New 
Year's  day,  the  alighting  of  which  with  its  toe 
pointing  outward,  is  considered  to  be  indicative  of 
departure  (cf.  my  Weihnnchten,  p.  273). 

The  shoe  was  the  symbol,  secondly,  of  rest  and 
possession.  With  the  shoe  one  trod  the  earth, 
whence  on  holy  ground  it  must  be  pulled  off;  over 
it,  one  had  complete  control,  and  hence  it  symbol- 
ized the  power  of  the  possessor  over  his  possession. 
In  the  Psalms  (lx.  10  (8) ;  cviii.  10  (9)),  God  casts 
his  shoe  over  Edom.  Rosenmuller  ( Morgenland,  n. 
48.3)  has  already  directed  attention  to  the  practice 
of  the  Abyssinian  Emperor,  who  throws  his  shoe 
over  that  which  he  desires  to  have.  That  which 
in  ecclesiastical  architecture  is  called  Marien- 
srhith  *  points  to  nothing  else  than  the  domin- 
ion ascribed  by  the  mediaeval  church  to  the  mother 
of  God.  The  custom  of  kissing  the  pope's  slipper, 
likewise  refers  to  his  dominion.  The  idea  of  the 
old  Scandinavian  legend,  according  to  which,  at 
the  last  day  the  wolf  finally  submits  to  Widar.  who 
sets  his  shoe  upon  him,  is  that  of  the  victory  of  the 
new  earth  over  the  old  wicked  enemy. 

The  shoe  symbolized  a  possession  which  one  ac- 
tually had,  and  could  tread  with  his  feet,  at  pleas- 
ure. Whoever  entered  into  this  possession  con- 
jointly with  another,  put  his  foot  into  the  same 
shoe,  as  in  old  German  law  was  done  by  an  adopted 
child  and  the  wife  (Grimm,  Eechtsaiterth.  p.  155). 
Hence,  when  in  our  passage  the  god.  pulled  off  his 
shoe  anil  gave  it  to  Boaz,  he  therewith  surrendered 
to  him  all  claims  to  the  right  of  possession  which 
would  have  been  his  had  he  fulfilled  its  conditions. 
Nor  has  that  use  of  the  shoe,  of  which  the  law 
speaks,  in  connection  with  the  leviratical  institute, 
any  different  meaning.  The  widow,  whose  brother- 
in-law  refuses  to  marry  her,  is  authorized  to  pull  off 
his  shoe,  and  to  spit  in  his  face.  His  house,  hence- 
forth, is  "  the  house  of  him  that  hath  had  his  shoe 
pulled  off."  Had  he  performed  his  duty,  he  would 
have  set  his  shoe  upon  the  inheritance  of  his  brother 
(including  wife  and  estate)  as  his  own.  But  hav- 
ing contemned  this,  he  undergoes  the  shame  of 
having  Ins  shoe  drawn  off  by  the  widow.  The 
shame  of  this  consisted  in  the  fact  that  he  must 
submit  to  it  at  the  hands  of  the  woman.  A  man 
might  pull  off  his  own  shoe,  and  hand  it  to  another, 
without  suffering  degradation.  This  was  done  in 
every  instance  of  exchange.  It  was  but  the  exercise 
of  his  manly  right.  But  when  the  shoe  was  taken 
from  him,  he  was,  as  it  were,  declared  destitute  of 
every  capacity  and  right  toward  the  widow  syrubol- 
ized'by  the  shoe,  and  in  tin's  consisted  the  disgrace. 

Now,  although  in  our  passage,  strictly  speaking, 

woman.  The  present  case  does  not  fall  under  the  latter 
head  (Cf.  the  lnlrod.  p.  8). 

3  [  Word.nvonh :  The  returning  prodigal  in  the  gospel 
has  shoes  put  on  his  feet  (Luke  xv.  22):  he  is  reinstated  io 
the  lost  inheritance.  We,  wnen  reconciled  to  God  in  Christ, 
have  our  "feet  shod  with  the  preparation  of  the  gospel 
of  peace"  (Eph.  vi.  15).  — Tr.) 

»  [Mariensckuh,  "Our  Lady's  slipper."  A  sculptured  rep. 
resentation  of  the  flower  or  plant  usually  called  "Lady's  slip 
per?  "  —  Tr.1 


CHAPTER   IV.   1-12. 


49 


■  similar  case  to  that  contemplated  by  the  law  in 
Dent,  xxv.  7  ff.  occurs  —  for  the  kinsman  refuses 
to  marry  Ruth — yet  the  ceremony  of  the  kins- 
man's* delivering  his  shoe  to  Boaz  was  significant 
only  of  his  simple,  voluntary  renunciation  of  his 
rights.  On  the  one  hand,  Ruth  was  not  his  sister- 
in-law  :  and  although  custom,  in  accordance  with 
the  spirit  of  the  Mosaic  law,  acknowledged  the 
duty  even  in  cases  of  more  distant  relationship,  the 
letter  of  the  law  did  not  reach  him.  On  the  other 
hand,  —  and  this  was  undoubtedly  a  point  of  real 
weight.  —  his  refusal  to  marry  Ruth  was  itself 
based  on  regard  for  the  law,  albeit  narrow  and 
unspiritual ;  fur  from  bis  readiness  to  redeem  the 
land,  it  is  but  jfuir  to  infer  that  he  would  have 
been  equally  ready  to  do  his  duty  by  her,  had  she 
been  an  Israelitess.  Inasmuch,  therefore,  as  he 
thinks  it  possible  to  separate  the  redemption  of  the 
land  from  that  'of  the  woman,  he  comes  off  more 
honorably  than  would  under  ordinary  circum- 
stances have  been  the  case.  His  language  refers 
explicitly  only  to  the  estate,  which  had  the  effect 
of  lessening  the  dishonor  done  to  Ruth,  especially 
as  Eoaz  declares  himself  ready  to  take  his  place 
Finally,  according  to  ch.  iii.  18,  Ruth  was  not 
present  at  the  negotiation,  the  representation  of 
Josephus  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.1 

Ver.  9  f.  And  Boaz  said,  Ye  are  witnesses 
this  day  that  I  have  acquired  (do  acquire),  etc. 
The  kinsman  having  drawn  off  his  shoe,  in  token 
of  his  renunciation  of  his  rights  as  nearest  god, 
Boaz  arose,  and  declared,  fully  and  formally,  that 
it e  acquires  everything  that  belonged  to  Elime- 
lech,  and  (as  is  now  expressed  at  full  length)  every- 
thing that  belonged  to  Chilion  and  Mahlon.  He 
acquires  it  from  Naomi ;  but  as  he  cannot  acquire 
it  without  also  marrying  the  wife  of  Mahlon,  as 
Ruth  is  here  for  the  first  time  called,  —  for  which 
reason  he  made  special  mention  of  the  possession 
of  the  sons,  —  he  adds  that  he  takes  her  "  to  raise 
up  the  name  of  the  dead  upon  his  inheritance,  in 
order  that  his  name  be  not  cut  off  from  among  his 
brethren,  and  from  the  gate  of  his  place."  In 
these  words,  he  thoroughly,  albeit  indirectly,  re- 
futed the  motive  by  which  the  anonymous  kins- 
man was  actuated  in  his  refusal.  When  the  name 
of  a  brother  is  to  be  rescued  from  oblivion  among 
his  own  people,  all  scruples  vanish.  The  fulfill- 
ment of  a  duty  so  pious,  lifts  a  man  up  beyond  the 
reach  of  fear.  Boaz  apprehends  no  damage  to  his 
own  inheritance ;  but  hopes  rather,  while  taking 
Ruth  under  his  wings,  to  repair  the  evil  which  the 
migration  to  Moab  has  inflicted  upon  the  house  of 
Elimelech.  This  pious  magnanimity,  this  humble 
acceptance  of  duty,  this  readiness  to  act  where  the 
nearer  kinsman  hesitates,  and  this  true  insight  of 
faith,  which  looked  not  at  the  birthplace  of  Ruth, 
but  at  what  she  had  done  for  Israel  and  now  was 
in  Israel,  and  thus  dissolved  all  superstitious  fear 
in  the  divine  wisdom  of  love,  win  for  him  also  the 
approbation  of  all  present.  The  public  voice  spoke 
well  of  Ruth ;  all  knew  how  loving,  virtuous,  and 
self-sacrificing  she  was  (cf.  ch.  ii.  11;  iii.  11). 
Hence,  not  only  the  elders  who  had  been  sum- 
moned as  witnesses,  but  also  all  the  people,  uni- 
tedly invoked  the  blessing  of  God  upon  him. 

1  Although,  singularly  enough,  Grotius  has  adopted  it. 
In  the  mauuer  in  which  the  law  against  the  recusant  goel 
was  executed  in  the  times  of  the  second  temple,  cf.  the 
Mishna,  Jebamolh,  cap.  xii. 

2  [It  is  perhaps  superfluous  to  remark,  that  our  author 
ntends  this  as  an  interpretation,  not  as  a  translation.  His 
ranslation  is  bracketed  in  the  text.  —  Ta.] 

4 


Ver.  11.  Jehovah  make  the  woman  that 
cometh  into  thy  hou~:e,  like  Rachel  and  Leah, 
which  two  did  build  the  house  of  Israel.  From 
Rachel  and  Leah  came  the  tribes  of  Israel.  As 
these  built  the  house  of  Jacob,  so,  say  the  peopla 
may  Ruth  build  thy  house.  The  extent  of  tW. 
general  delight,  may  be  measured  by  the  fact  that 
it  wishes  for  Ruth  the  Moabitess  a  blessing  equal 
to  that  of  the  wives  of  Jacob  who  were  Israelitesses. 
The  Jewish  expositors  point  out  that  Rachel  stands 
before  Leah,  although  younger  and  less  blessed 
with  children,  and  although  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
and  Bethlehem  with  it,  descended  from  Leah.  It 
is  probable  that  the  whole  sentence  was  already  at 
that  time,  the  usual  formula  of  blessing  in  Israel- 
itish  marriages.  However  that  may  be,  the  tradi- 
tions of  Israel  made  Rachel  more  prominent  than 
Leah.  Rachel  was  Jacob's  first  and  best  beloved 
Rachel  took  away  her  father's  idol  images.  As 
she  suffered  many  sorrows  up  to  her  death,  so  the 
prophet  represents  her  as  weeping  bitterly  after 
death  for  her  children  (Jer.  xxxi.  15;  Matth.  ii. 
18).  It  was  Rachel,  too,  who  after  she  had  been 
long  unfruitful,  as  Ruth  in  Moab,  had  brought 
forth  most  of  those  sons  in  whom  Jacob  was  most 
highly  blessed.  But  the  people  desire  not  merely 
that    many  children    may  adorn   her  house ;  they 

proceed  :  '^D  Hit'^?,  may  she  make,  produce, 
strength,  ability,  heroism.2  They  wish  that  sons 
may  be  born,  who,  like  Boaz,  shall  be  heroes  of 
strength  (cf.  ch.  ii.  1 ),  so  that  "  great  names  "  may 
proceed  out  of  Bethlehem.3  The  blessing  was 
most  abundantly  fulfilled. 

Ver.  12.  And  be  thy  house  like  the  house 
of  Perez.  After  the  general  comes  the  special 
wish,  which  in  tins  instance  is  of  peculiar  impor- 
tance. Boaz  was  descended  from  Perez,  and  Perez 
was  the  son  of  Tatnar.  Now,  although  the  history 
of  Tamar  (Gen.  xxxviii.)  is  not  as  pure  as  that  of 
Ruth,  it  yet  contained  features  which  might  have 
served  as  precedents  to  Boaz.  Tamar's  first  two 
husbands  had  died  on  account  of  their  sins,  and 
Judah,  their  father,  would  not  give  her  the  third, 
"  lest  he  also  die  as  his  brethren."  This  was  the 
same  motive  as  that  which  must  have  influenced 
the  nearer  kinsman.  The  very  fact  that  he  had 
this  history  before  him,  confirms  the  conclusion  we 
have  already  reached  concerning  the  grounds  of  his 
refusal.  Tamar  suffered  injustice,  her  right  being 
withheld  from  her.  The  same  thing  happened  to 
Ruth.  No  one  thought  of  her  rights,  until  she 
laid  claim  to  them.  Tamar  did  the  same,  albeit 
not  in  the  pure  and  graceful  manmr  adopted  by 
Ruth.  Nevertheless,  Judah,  when  he  found  him- 
self outwitted  by  her,  said  :  "  She  is  more  righteous 
than  I,"  thus  acknowledging  his  injustice.  Boaz 
had  not  been  guilty  of  any  such  injustice ;  but  he 
felt  it  his  duty,  in  behalf  of  the  members  of  his 
family,  to  see  that  that  which  had  hitherto  been 
neglected  was  neglected  no  longer.  His  proceed- 
ing involved  an  admission  that  Ruth  had  not 
received  what  was  her  rightful  due  in  Israel.  The 
confession  of  injustice  draws  after  it  a  blessing; 
especially  here  in  the  case  of  Boaz,  whose  kind  and 
noble  conduct  is  beyond  all  praise. 

3  These  great  names,  as  sprung  from  Boaz,  would  of 
course  redound  to  his  honor.  To  be  nameless  was  to  be 
fameless,  as  is  illustrated  in  the  Peloni.  The  Greeks  alsc 
used  dvuyv^o;  as  the  opposite  of  kAcivos,  t.  e.  in  the  sens* 

of  fameless,  like  Dtf  ^7"2.  Cf.  Schleussner,  Lex.  en  tht 
LXX.,  i.  315. 


50 


THE   BOOK  OF   RUTH. 


HOMIT.KTICAL    AND    PRACTICAL. 

"  Ye  are  imtnesses  this  day  that  I  take  Ruth  the 
Moabitess  to  be  my  wife."  What  a  noble  pair  con- 
front each  other  in  the  persons  of  Ruth  and  Boaz  ! 
They  are  types  for  all  times  of  the  mutual  relations 
of  man  and  woman.  The  remark  of  Pascal,  that 
the  Old  Testament  contains  the  images  of  future 
joy,  is  here  especially  applicable.  Ruth  acts  to  the 
utmost  of  her  power  out  of  love  :  Boaz  is  a  man  of 
unfeigned  faith.  Ruth  takes  voluntary  duties  upon 
herself  from  love  to  Naomi :  Boaz  meets  these 
duties  in  the  spirit  of  obedience  to  the  commands 
of  God.  Ruth,  moved  by  love,  dares  to  risk  the 
delicate  reserve  of  woman ;  and  Boaz  offsets  her 
deed  by  a  delicacy  of  faith  which  would  comply,  if 
it  were  but  to  avoid  wounding,  and  gives  all,  in 
order  to  satisfy.  He  promises  everything,  if  only  he 
may  relieve  Ruth  from  fear.     Ruth  followed  into 


poverty  from  love ;  and  Boaz,  though  rich,  regarui 
only  the  duty  prescribed  by  faith.  Ruth  was 
ignorant  of  the  prejudices  that  stood  in  her  way  ; 
Boaz  knew  and  overcame  them.  Ruth  thought 
she  had  a  right  to  claim  ;  Boaz  was  under  no  obli- 
gation, and  yet  acted.  The  nearest  redeeme! 
retreated,  most  probably  because  Ruth  was  a 
Moabitess  ;  Boaz  says,  "  Ye  are  witnesses  that  I 
take  the  Moabitess  to  wife."  An  ancient  church- 
father  says  :  "  Boaz,  in  accordance  with  the  merito- 
riousness  of  his  faith  received  Ruth  tor  his  wife,  in 
order  that  from  so  sanctified  a  marriage  a  royal 
race  might  be  born.  For  Boaz,  well  advanced  in 
years,  received  his  wife,  not  for  himself,  but  for 
God  ;  not  to  fulfill  the  desires  of  the  flesh,  but  to 
fulfill  the  righteousness  of  the  law,  in  order  to  raise 
up  a  seed  for  his  relative.  He  was  inflamed  more 
by  conscience  than  by  passion ;  he  was  old  by 
years,  but  youthful  by  faith,  —  and  for  this  perhaps 
he  was  called,  Boaz  — '  in  him  is  virtue.'  " 


Veeses    13-22. 


The  Completion  of  the  Blessing. 

13  So  Boaz  took  Ruth,  and  she  was  [became]  his  wife  :  and  when  [omit :  when] 
he  went  in  unto  her,  [and]  the  Lord  [Jehovah]  gave  her  conception,  and  she  bare  a 

14  son.  And  the  women  said  unto  Naomi,  Blessed  be  the  Lord  [Jehovah],  which  hath 
not  left  thee  this  day  without  a  kinsman  [redeemer],  that  his  name  may  be  [and  may 

15  his  name  be]  famous  in  Israel.  And  he  shall  [may  he]  be  unto  thee  a  restorer  of  thy 
life  [soul],  and  a  nourisher  [support]  :  of  thine  old  age  :  for  thy  daughter-in-law, 

16  which  loveth  thee,  which  is  better  to  thee  than  seven  sons,  hath  borne  him.     And 

17  Naomi  took  the  child,  and  laid  it  in  her  bosom,  and  became  nurse  unto  it.  And  the 
women  her  neighbors  gave  it  a  name,  saying,  There  is  a  son  born  to  Naomi  ;  and  they 
called  his  name  Obed  :  he  is  the  father  of  Jesse,  the  father  of  David. 

18,  19        Now  these  are  the  generations  of  Pharez :  Pharez  begat  Hezron,  and  Hezron 

20  begat     Ram,    and    Ram    begat   Aminadab,   and   Aminadab    begat    Nahshon,  and 

21  Nahshon    begat    Salmon    [Salmah],2  and    Salmon     begat    Boaz,  and   Boaz  begat 

22  Obed,  and  Obed  begat  Jesse,  and  Jesse  begat  David. 

TEXTUAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL. 

[1  Ver.  15.  —  Lit.  "  and  may  he  support  thine  old  age."  On  the  form  of  73  v3  (from  Vl3),  cf.  Ges.  55,  4  ;  on  iti 
construction  after  TITT,  which  here  however  has  the  force  of  the  jussive  (optative)  through  its  connection  with  the  pre- 
ceding verb,  Gea.  132,  3,  Rem.  1.  —  On  the  forms  TjrQilSI  and  Wlb?,  cf.  Ges.  59,  Rem.  3.  —  Tr.] 

[2  Ver.  20.  —  Salmah  (HOytt?  or  KDvU?,  1  Chron.  ii.  11)  appears  in  ver.  21  as  Salmon,  which  many  MSS.  read 
here  also.  Originally,  the  name  was  probably  used  indiscriminately  either  with  the  termination  ] —  or  ]1  cf.  Gea. 
M,  15).     By  detrition  of  the   3,   ]Obtt7    became   nobjtf.  —  Te.] 


EXEGETICAL    AND    DOCTRINAL. 

Ver.  13.  And  she  brought  forth  a  son.  With 
this  happy  event  the  last  shadows  disappear  from  the 
checkered  lives  of  the  two  women.  The  fears  of  su- 
perstition are  shown  to  have  been  groundless.  Sor- 
row in  Moab  has  been  changed  into  happiness  in 
Israel.  The  reward  of  love  has  begun,  and  Jehovah 
mercifully  owns  the  daughter  of  Moab,  who  has  left 
Some  and  native  land  for  his  people's  sake.  Great 
\re  the  joys  which  surround  the  cradle  of  the  child 


of  such  parents  as  Boaz  and  Ruth.  The  father  of 
Nero  is  said  to  have  made  the  terrible  exclamation  : 
"  What  shall  come  of  a  son  who  has  me  for  his 
father  and  Agrippina  for  his  mother !  "  But  here, 
where  love  had  been  married  to  piety,  humility  to 
heroism,  innocence  to  believing  insight,  everybody 
must  look  for  a  future  of  blessings.  A  child  of 
Ruth  and  Boaz  had  no  need  of  goddesses  and  fairies 
to  come  to  its  cradle,  in  order,  according  to  popu- 
lar legends,  to  bring  wealth  and  good  wishes.  The 
blessing  of  the  Almighty  God,  who  lot  ks  not  at  th« 


CHAPTER   IV.    13-22. 


51 


person,  but  at  the  heart,  has  spread  out  its  wings 
aver  the  child. 

Ver.  14.  And  the  women  said  unto  Naomi. 
What  a  difference  between  the  beginning  and  the 
end  of  Naomi's  life  in  Israel  since  her  return ! 
When  she  came  back,  poor  and  lonely,  where  were 
the  women  and  neighbors,  who  ought  to  have  com- 
forted, supported,  and  stood  by  her  in  her  necessity  ? 
Nothing  is  heard  of  them.  Nobody  was  with  her 
I. ut  Ruth.  But  now  they  appear  with  their  good 
wishes  for  Naomi  and  praises  to  God ;  for  adversity 
has  vanished.  Ruth  is  no  longer  the  poor  gleaner, 
who  painfully  gathers  a  living  for  her  mother,  but 
the  happy  wife  of  Boaz.  A  new  name  has  been 
raised  up  for  the  inheritance  of  Elimelech. 

Who  hath  not  left  a  redeemer  to  be  want- 
ing to  thee  this  day.  It  is  one  of  the  peculiar 
beauties  of  our  narrative  that  its  last  words  are 
almost  wholly  devoted  to  Naomi  (vers.  14-18). 
And  justly  so ;  for  it  was  Naomi  who  by  her  exem- 
plary life  in  Moab  had  been  the  instructress  of 
Ruth.  For  her  sake,  the  noble  woman  had  come 
to  Israel.  Upon  her,  affliction  had  fallen  most  se- 
verely (ch.  i.  13),  bereaving  her  of  both  husband 
and  children.  Against  her,  the  hand  of  Jehovah 
had  gone  forth,  so  that  she  bade  acquaintances  to 
call  her,  not  Naomi,  but  Mara.  Moreover,  a  heart- 
union  existed  between  herself  and  Ruth,  such  as  is 
not  often  to  be  found  between  even  natural  mother 
and  daughter.  The  happiness  of  Ruth  would  have 
been  her  happiness  also,  even  if  no  national  usages 
and  habits  had  come  in  to  make  it  such.  How  ten- 
der and  delicate  is  the  feeling  which  these  usages 
and  habits  set  forth,  of  the  sacred  and  indissoluble 
character  of  the  marriage  bond.  And  yet  modern 
self-conceit  —  that,  and  not  Christian  self-knowl- 
edge—  perpetually  talks  of  the  inferiority  of  wo- 
man's position  under  the  old  covenant !  Boaz  had 
married  Ruth,  as  a  blood-relative  of  her  former 
husband,  in  order  to  raise  up  the  name  of  the  latter 
upon  his  inheritance.  The  childless  widow  did  not, 
as  happens  so  often  among  us,  leave  the  family  of 
her  deceased  husband,  as  if  she  had  never  become 
a  member  of  it.  The  blood-relative  obtains  a  son 
by  her,  and  the  birth  of  this  son  becomes  an  occa- 
sion for  congratulations  to  the  mother  of  the  former 
husband.  The  child  borne  by  Ruth  to  Boaz  as  a 
blood-relative,  although  not  the  nearest,  of  Naomi's 
husband,  is  called  by  the  women  the  god  of  Naomi, 
and  they  praise  God  that  he  has  not  left  Naomi 
without  him.  There  is,  no  doubt,  a  legal  ground 
for  this.  For  the  child  inherits  the  estate  of  Elim- 
elech, because  its  mother  was  formerly  the  wife  of 
his  son,  and  with  this  estate  the  life  of  Naomi  also 
is  connected.  Not  Boaz,  who  has  redeemed  the  in- 
heritance, but  the  child  for  whom  he  redeemed  it, 
is  the  real  god  of  Naomi  —  the  person,  that  is,  in 
whom  her  sinking  house  again  raises  itself;  for  he 
is  the  son  of  her  son's  wife,  albeit  bv  another  hus- 
band. He  is  the  grandson  of  her  family,  though 
not  of  her  blood.  Ruth's  god  was  Boaz,  but  Nao- 
mi's the  son  of  Ruth  ;  for  Ruth  lives  in  the  house 
of  Boaz,  but  Naomi  in  that  of  the  child,  which  be- 
longs to  him  by  virtue  of  his  birth  from  Ruth. 
These  are  practical  definitions  of  the  leviratical 
law  ;  but  how  thoroughly  moral  the  views  on  which 
they  rest !  how  close  the  sympathy  and  brotherhood 
they  seek  to  establish,  and  how  indissoluble  the 
marriage  covenant  which  they  presuppose ! 

Undoubtedly,  the  most  moral  law  can  become 
torpii,  and  receive  only  an  external  fulfillment  or 
even  be  evaded.  Laws  are  living  and  active  among 
»  people  only  so  long  as  the  spirit  that  gave  them 
•>eing  continues  to  live.     The  conduct  of  the  un- 


known blood-relative  has  sufficiently  shown,  tha 
the  law  alone  could  have  afforded  no  help  to  Ruth 
and  Naomi.  The  whole  history  of  Naomi  in  Israel, 
after  her  return  from  Moab  and  up  to  the  interven- 
tion of  Boaz,  testifies  to  the  inability  of  the  letter 
of  the  law  to  avert  misery  and  distress.  Boaz  fol- 
lowed, not  the  letter  of  the  law,  but  its  spirit ;  ana 
hence  did  more  than  the  letter  demanded.  In  the 
persons  of  those  with  whon  our  narrative  is  mainly 
concerned,  the  doctrine  vei  ties  itself  that  there  is 
no  law  so  strong  as  the  law  of  love.  It  is  this  doc- 
trine which  the  women  also  have  come  to  recognize 
when  they  say  to  Naomi :  — 

Ver.  15.  For  thy  daughter-in-law,  who  lov- 
eth  thee,  and  who  is  better  to  thee  than  seven 
sons,  hath  borne  him.   The  child,  say  the  women, 

shall  refresh  thy  soul,  —  the  soul  C?5,  animus,  of 

Naomi  was   bowed  down  with   sorrow,  the  child 

will  restore  (^tl'n)   her  courage,  —  and  support 

thy  old  age ;  and  this,  they  add.  not  because  the 
law  makes  him  heir  to  the  estate  of  his  mother's 
family,  but  because  Ruth  has  borne  him.  The  re- 
vivieation  of  Naomi's  happiness  through  the  birth 
of  this  child,  was  more  securely  guaranteed  by  the 
love  of  Ruth,  than  by  friendship  and  blood-relation 
ship.  True,  Naomi  herself  is  childless ;  but  seven 
sons  could  not  have  done  for  her  what  Ruth  did. 
The  women  acknowledge  now  how  far  short  the 
legal  friendship  of  Israel  towards  Naomi  has  fallen, 
in  comparison  with  the  self-sacrifice  of  the  daugh- 
ter of  Moab.  And  thus  there  comes  to  view  here 
so  much  the  more  plainly,  the  doctrine  —  in  its 
higher  sense  prophetic,  under  the  old  covenant  — 
that  love,  living,  active,  self-forgetful,  self-sacrificing 
love,  transcends  all  law  and  family  considerations. 
Christ  announces  the  same  doctrine  in  its  highest 
form.when  he  says  :  "  Whosoever  shall  do  the  will 
of  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven,  the  same  is  my 
brother,  and  sister,  and  mother"  (Matt.  xii.  50). 
Ruth's  love  for  Naomi  takes  the  place  of  physical 
descent.  It  engrafts  her  child,  as  it  were,  into  the 
heart  of  Naomi.  In  itself  the  child  is  only  the 
grandson  of  her  family  and  estate ;  on  account  of 
Ruth's  love,  it  becomes  to  her  a  veritable  grand- 
child of  love,  nearer  to  her  heart  than  if  a  daugh- 
ter of  her  own  had  given  birth  to  it.  The  power 
of  pure  and  self-forgetful  love,  such  as  Ruth  had 
entertained,  could  not  be  more  beautifully  delin- 
eated. 

Ver.  16.  And  she  became  foster-mother  to 
it.  She  took  it  into  her  lap,  like  an  actual  grand- 
mother. She  formed  the  child  in  Israelitish  life 
and  customs.  She  became  to  it  what  Mordecai 
was  to  Esther,  an  instructress  in  the  law  and  Israel- 
itish culture.  The  son  of  Ruth  became  to  her  an 
actual  grandchild  of  love.  For  this  reason  the  fe- 
male neighbors  give  him  a  name  whose  significa- 
tion is  equivalent  to  Naomi's  son. 

Ver.  17.  They  called  his  name,  Obed.  There 
are  several  noteworthy  points  connected  with  this. 
The  female  neighbors,  in  order  to  give  pleasure  to 
Naomi,  give  the  child  a  name.  But  beside  this,  he 
doubtless  received  a  name  from  his  parents,  prob- 
ably one  that  belonged  to  the  family.  But  that 
given  by  the  women  continued  to  be  his  usual  name, 
and  by  it  he  was  inserted  into  the  family  genealogy. 
Consequently,  the  idea  enunciated  in  it  must  have 
been  specially  characteristic.  The  text  says  : 
"  They  gave  him  a  name,  namely,  a  son  is  born 
to  Naomi ; "  and  hence  they  called  him  Obed. 
Now,  whether  the  name  Obed  be  explained  as  ser- 
vant of  God  or  servant  of  Naomi,  the  sense  in  either 


52 


THE   BOOR  OF  RUTH. 


;ase  remains  insipid.1  What  the  women  mean  is, 
not  that  the  child  is  the  servant  of  Naomi,  hut  that 
he  is  to  her  as  a  son.'2  If  the  words  of  ver.  1 7  are  to 
have  a  plain  sense;  nay,  if  the  preservation  of  just 
that  name  which  the  female  neighbors  gave  him  is 
to  have  an  explanation,  the  name  Obed  must  in 
some  way  express  the  idea  of  the  word  "  son."  For 
in  this  name  "  son,"  given  with  reference  to  Naomi, 
there  is  contained  the  idea  that  the  sin  which  lay 
at  the  base  of  her  evil  fortune  had  been  atoned  for. 
She  who  lost  the  children  of  her  own  body,  had 
now  a  son  in  the  spirit  of  true  love.  It  is  true,  that 
from  the  philological  stores  extant  in  the  Bible,  the 
explanation  of  Obed  in  the  sense  of  "  son  "  is  not 
possible ;  but  it  may  be  done  by  the  assistance  of 
other  languages.  It  is  sufficiently  clear  that  Obed 
is  to  be  connected  with  the  Greek  ircudtov  (irais, 
irmScJs),  Latin  putus,  Sanskrit  pita,  putra,  Persian 
puser." 

The  circumstance  that  Obed  was  used  in  the  sense 
of  "  son,"  justifies  the  conjecture  that  in  the  Hebrew 
of  that  day  there  were  various  foreign  words  in  use, 
probably  introduced  through  Aramaic  influences, 
without  postulating  a  closer  contact  of  the  so-called 
Semitic  with  the  Indo-germanic  tongues  than  is 
usually  assumed. 

He  is  the  father  of  Jesse,  the  father  of  David. 
In  these  words  the  doctrine  of  the  whole  Book 
reaches  its  point  of  culmination.  They  point  out 
the  completion  of  the  blessing  pronounced  on  Ruth 
by  Boaz.  The  name  of  the  superstitious  kinsman, 
who  thought  that  marriage  with  the  Moabitess 
would  endanger  his  inheritance,  is  forgotten  ;  bnt 

from  Boaz  descends  the  Hero  O^n  1133),  the 
King  of  Poets,  David,  the  Prophet,  and  type  of 
the  Messiah.  From  him  Christ  comes  through 
the  promise,  even  as  Obed  was  the  son  of  Naomi 
through  the  love  of  Ruth.4  The  doctrine  of  the 
whole  narrative  is  expressed  in  the  words  of  the 
Apostle,  "  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law." 

Note.  —  Verses  18-22  are  an  addition  from  the  genealogi- 
cal tables  of  the  House  of  David.  The  chronological  ques- 
tion involved  in  them  must  be  considered  in  connection 
with  the  other  analogous  data,  for  which  reason  we  refer 
here  to  1  Chron.  ii.  8  ff. 


HOMILETICAL  AND  PRACTICAL. 

"  Naomi  took  the  child."  Whoever  was  once 
capable  of  true  love,  preserves  its  power  forever  af- 
ter. Throughout  her  history,  until  the  close  of 
the  narrative,  Naomi's  name  is  truly  descriptive  of 
her  character.      Her  love  is  the  cause  of  the  bless- 

1  The  subterfuge  of  he  Clerc,  who  proposes  to  read  121S, 
in  the  sense  of  K  unfortunate,  poor  one,''  with  reference  to 
the  poverty  once  suffered  by  Ruth,  is  entirely  wrong,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  fact  that  the  word  itself  does  not  have  the 
sense  which  he  assigns  to  it. 

■2  [But  is  not  the  emphasis  to  be  laid  on  ,f  to  Naomi " 
rather  than  on  "  son  ?  "  It  is  true,  that  analogy  leads  us 
to  expect  the  name  to  contain  specifically  the  same  idea  ex 
pressed  by  the  women  (cf.  however  Gen.  xxix.  32);  but  it 
must  also" be  admitted  (with  Berth.)  that  Obed  in  the  sense 
of  "  one  that  serves,"  sc.  Naomi,  harmonizes  well  with  the 
»ords  in  ver.  16  :  "  May  he  be  to  thee  a  soul-restorer,  and 
i  support  of  thine  old  age."  —  Tb,.] 

8  As  regards  the  'J  in  "OV,  its  value  (best  compared 
perhaps  with  a  spiritus  asper)  is  exactly  the  same  as  in 
V\v   to  be  compared  with  Itztari  and  talus,  vQJ?  with 


moliri,  pD3?  with  ixqicos,  etc. 


ing  that  finally  ensues,  for  by  it  she  won  love.  It 
sustained  her  in  suffering,  —  it  prompted  her  to  ao 
tion  in  behalf  of  her  daughter-in-law.  Now  in  the 
end  she  enjoys  its  blessing,  and  becomes  the  loving 
foster-mother  of  the  child  of  her  who  was  better  to 
her  than  seven  sons. 

Naomi  is  everywhere  an  image  of  the  Church  of 
Christ,  which  wins,  confesses,  and  fosters  through 
love.  Men  whose  natural  hearts  are  hostile  to  her, 
become  her  obedient  children.  When  there  is 
apostasy  and  misery  in  the  church,  it  is  for  priests 
and  preachers  to  repent,  as  Naomi  did,  and  not  to 
excuse  themselves.  If  they  really  have  the  spirit 
of  love,  they  cannot  but  feel  that  they  have  to 
blame  themselves  first  of  all.  When  the  church 
does  not  make  converts  among  heathen  and  Jews, 
the  attempt  to  lay  the  guilt  of  this  judgment  on 
them,  and  to  excuse  ourselves,  is  a  sign  of  a  hard 
heart.  Alas !  God  alone  knows  what  heavy  loads 
of  guilty  responsibility  rest  on  the  church  for  hav- 
ing herself  given  the  impulse  by  which  thousands 
were  kept  from  coming  to  the  Saviour.  And  how 
greatly  she  sins,  when  she  does  not  rightly  foster 
those  who  do  come,  exhibiting  neither  love,  nor 
wisdom,  nor  faith  in  her  treatment  of  them,  —  that 
too  will  one  day  be  made  manifest.  Impatience  is 
not  in  love ;  and  a  little  money  does  not  make 
amends  for  the  coldness  of  consummate  self-right- 
eousness. They  are  children,  who  are  laid  in  the 
lap  of  the  church,  —  children  according  to  thft 
spirit,  that  is  to  say  real  children,  who,  by  God'? 
grace,  bring  a  greater  blessing  to  the  church  thar 
seven  sons  according  to  the  flesh. 

Pascal  :  "  Two  laws  are  sufficient  to  regulati 
the  whole  Christian  Church  more  completely  thai 
all  political  law  could  do :  love  to  God,  and  love 
to  one's  neighbor." 

"  They  said,  there  is  a  son  born  to  Naomi,  and 
called  his  name  Obed ;  he  is  the  father  of  Jesse,  the 
father  of  David."  Boaz  predicted  a  blessing  for 
Ruth,  and  the  faith  through  which  he  did  it  was 
rewarded  by  his  being  made  a  sharer  in  it.  All  he 
did  was  to  utter  a  word  of  prophecy,  prompted  by 
his  faith  in  the  grace  of  his  God,  and  lo,  he  was 
made  the  progenitor  of  David,  the  prophet !  He 
who  firmly  relies  on  the  love  of  God,  is  always  i. 
seer.  Boaz  had  faith  enough  to  bring  about,  in 
due  time,  the  fulfillment  of  his  own  benediction, 
and  became  the  ancestor  of  Him  in  whom  all  the 
prophecies  of  David  are  fulfilled.  Of  Boaz  him- 
self no  warrior  deeds  are  known,  and  yet  the  great- 
est of  Israel's  heroes,  the  conqueror  of  Goliath,5 
sprang  from  him.  He  conquered  himself,  and  on 
that  account  became  the  ancestor  of  Him  who  tri- 
umphed over  sin  and  death.     Similarly,  Buth  had 

4  The  reference  of  Grotius  to  the  traditionary  history  of 
Ocrisia,  who  became  the  mother  of  Servius  Tullius,  is  very 
unfortunate.  Ocrisia  was  a  slave.  Her  story  has  no  eth- 
ical background.  The  legends  concerning  her  were  only 
designed  to  glorify  the  derivation  of  the  king.  Cf.  Niebuhr, 
BUtn.  fiesch.  i.  375  (2d  edit.). 

6  It  is  on  the  ground  of  this  contrast  that  Jewish  tradi- 
tion homiletically  advanced  the  idea  that  Goliath  descended 
from  Orpah.  who  returned  to  Moab,  as  David  from  Ruth 
The  early  teachers  of  the  church  were  acquainted  with  this 
tradition,  and  Prudentius  even  introduced  it  into  his  poem, 
Hamartigenia,  ver.  782 :  — 

"  Sed  pristinus  Orphss 
Fanorum  ritus  prseputia  barbara  suasit 
Malle,  et  semiferi  stirpem  nutrire  Golias. 
Ruth,  dum  per  stipulas  agresti  amburitur  sseta 
Fulcra  Booz  meruit,  castoque  adscita  cubili 
Christigenam  fecunda  domum,  Davldica  regna 
Edidit  atque  deo  mortales  miscuit  ortufl." 


CHAPTER   IV.    13-22. 


53 


nothing  but  a  heart  fall  of  love,  and  jret  to  her, 
once  a  daughter  of  Moab,  there  was  given  what 
neither  Deborah  nor  Jael  obtained,  —  to  become  the 
mother  of  Him  bj  whom  all  the  nations  are  re- 
deemed. 

Jerome  (on  Is.  xvi.  1 ) :  "0  Moab !  out  of  thee 
shall  come  forth  the  unspotted  Lamb,  which  bears 
the  sins  of  the  world,  and  rules  over  the  whole 
earth !  From  the  rock  of  the  wilderness,  i.  e.  from 
Ruth,  widowed  by  the  death  of  her  husband,  Boaz 


derived  Obed     ....    and  from  David  came 
Christ." 

Geklach  :  "  Thus  the  coming  of  the  great  King 
is  prepared  for,  upon  whom  the  Lord  had  deter- 
mined to  confirm  the  dominion  over  his  people  for 
evermore ;  and  the  converted  Moabitess,  who  en- 
tered as  a  worthy  member  into  the  commonwealth 
of  the  people  of  God,  became  the  mother  of  David 
and  of  Christ." 


The  Jewish  tradition  which  makes  Ruth  a  descendant  of  Eglon,  the  Moabitish  king  who  oppressed 
Israel  as  a  punishment  for  its  sins,  contains  an  allegory  worthy  of  notice.  The  daughter  of  the  op- 
pressor, becomes  the  mother  of  the  Liberator,  the  Redeemer  out  of  the  House  of  David.  According  to 
the  Jewish  expositors  the  name  Ruth  is  derived  from  a  root  which  signifies  to  give  drink,  to  assuage 
thirst  [Berachoth,  7  a) ;  and  from  her,  say  they,  David  came,  who  with  his  songs  and  psalms  supplied 
the  wants  of  those  who  thirst  after  God.  And  from  David,  we  may  add,  came  the  Saviour  who 
gave  to  the  Samaritan  woman  when  she  thirsted,  of  that  fountain  which  springs  up  unto  everlasting 
life. 

The  ancient  church  selected  the  sixteenth  of  July  as  the  day  on  which  to  commemorate  Ruth.1  The 
reason  for  this  is  probably  to  be  found  in  the  following  considerations  :  In  Deut,  xxiii.  3,  it  is  said : 
"  An  Ammonite  or  Moabite  shall  not  enter  into  the  congregation  of  Jehovah ;  even  to  their  tenth  gen- 
eration they  shall  not  enter."  This  was  supposed  to  have  been  fulfilled  in  Ruth.  In  the  genealogy  of 
the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew,  Boaz,  through  whom  Ruth  was  received  into  the  congregation  of 
Jehovah,  is  the  tenth  from  Abraham.  But  it  was  the  Lord  and  Saviour,  whose  day  Abraham  saw, 
and  who  according  to  the  flesh  descended  from  Ruth,  who  first  took  away  the  curse  from  Moab  also. 
This  was  announced  by  Isaiah,  when  in  addressing  Moab,  he  says  (ch.  xvi.  5)  :  "In  mercy  shall  a 
throne  be  prepared,  that  one  sit  upon  it  in  truth,  in  the  tabernacle  of  David,  and  judge,  and  seek  judg- 
ment, and  hasten  righteousness."  Now,  as  the  ancient  church  set  apart  the  sixth  of  July  for  Isaiah, 
because  he  prophesied  of  Christ,  who  suffered  on  the  sixth  day  of  the  week,  and  whose  incarnation  was 
celebrated  on  the  sixth  of  January,  it  fixed  the  anniversary  of  Ruth  ten  days  later,  on  the  sixteenth  of 
July.  Thus  her  name  and  the  number  of  her  day  are  symbolical  of  prophecy  and  grace.  But  ten 
days  farther  on,  the  twenty-sixth,  is  the  day  of  Anna,  whom  tradition  makes  to  be  the  mother  of  the 
Virgin  Mary.  Thus  the  name  of  Ruth  stood  ten  days  after  the  prophecy  and  ten  days  before  its  ap- 
proaching fulfillment,  equally  distant  from  him  who  prophecied  of  the  Virgin  and  from  her  who  was 
the  Virgin's  mother.  The  Moabitish  stranger  finds  herself  in  the  middle  between  the  seer  who  beheld 
the  wilderness  of  Moab  become  fruitful,  and  the  nearest  ancestress  of  Him  who  delivers  Moab  and  all 
the  world  from  barrenness  and  thirst. 

Pictorially,  the  ancient  church  represented  Ruth  with  a  sheaf  in  her  hand.  As  was  natural,  she  was 
always  conceived  as  youthful.  She  might  be  represented  with  a  rose,  in  accordance  with  what  may  be 
the  meaning  of  her  name  (see  on  ch.  i.  4).  The  Rose  of  Bethlehem  was  the  ancestress  of  the  Rose  of 
Jesse  (Mary),  whom  ancient  pictures  represent  sitting-  in  a  rosebush.  Both  rose  and  sheaf  are  symbols 
of  the  truth  that  though  love  may  sow  in  tears,  it  will  through  God's  compassion  reap  in  joy. 

l  CI  my  article  In  the  Btrt.  Wochinblatt,  1863,  Num.  32 


Date  Due 

\Z/ 

r 

^^s 

'yj-M$ 

* 

W^SrA 

3~ 

AG  2  6  '4g 

1 

f******* 

pjj.  ai  iiri 

«mi*m  :  '* 

<§) 

